> > On Jun 13, 2006, at 8:24 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > Past the above, I have no better ideas for getting patches reviewed > > other than appointing more maintainers. > > I'd welcome the issue be addressed by the SC. I'd favor more timely > reviews. Maybe auto approval for a patch that sits for more than a > week? :-)
Auto approving is the wrong approach except in the case where the patch is small, even then questionable. Maybe a system where you can trade reviews for patches. Like if you want a patch to be reviewed and you make a promise to also do another patch for the review. Yes this might not always work but it might help the current situation. -- Pinski
