Hi Tobias, Am Freitag, dem 03.06.2022 um 13:21 +0200 schrieb Tobias Geerinckx- Rice: > Hi Lily, > > Liliana Marie Prikler 写道： > > That is once it's established that a new > > contribution is actually a contribution, the patch is forwarded > > separately to guix-mentors (along with reply-to: for the > > original bug etc. set up in a way that's useful to mentors), > > claiming takes place, and so on. > > I have trouble parsing this. > > Can you highlight the difference(s) with the existing Guix lists, > if any? So first things first, this would only apply to guix-patches (I believe), since that is where "contributions" as in "patches that need review" are sent to. My proposal is roughly as follows: 1. When a new contributor sends a mail to guix-patches, the mail gets added to a manual approval queue. (This currently happens) 2. A human operator manually approves of the patch as in flags it as "Not spam" (This currently happens) 3. A new issue number is claimed in debbugs, yadda yadda. 4. Since we know (from 1+2), that this is a new contributor, a separate message is sent to guix-mentors (from debbugs or what have you) informing mentors about this contribution.
My proposal is to have step 4 implemented in software, sitting in debbugs, the approval queue software, or possibly both depending on how much interaction they need, rather than reminding potential newcomers that guix-mentors exists and that they should CC it to get faster code review. Alternatively to the above, which would (in theory) forward the patches as soon as improved, we could implement this with a separate backend such as mumi, which would basically check for new patches, check whether any of those patches come from hitherto unknown sources, and if so send a mail towards guix-mentors. Does that help clear things up? As for guix-mentors vs. other mailing lists, refer to Ricardo's initial proposal. Interestingly, zimoun had a similar idea, but phrased it less wordy. Cheers
