On 5/27/10 7:05 AM, "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Valentin Villenave <valen...@villenave.net> writes: > >> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Graham Percival >> <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: >> nobody really felt that actually committing the patches was their job. > > The problem is that committing a patch suggests some basic > responsibility. If a patch is not within the comfort zone of > prospective committers, it tends to rot.
I think that there is truth in both of those issues. For Frogs, I have the responsibility of committing patches. But for David's patch, it's outside my comfort zone. Han-Wen and Nicolas reviewed the patch, and thought it looked fine. I dropped the ball in committing it. Because it was outside my comfort zone, I wasn't going to commit it without approval from somebody who knew better. Perhaps I should have been more aggressive in asking for specific reviews. Certainly I should not have lost track of the issue for 2 weeks. > >> - "Patch"-tagged issued on the tracker don't seem to work either... >> It has been suggested in the past (by you) that we could use another >> mailing list, either specifically for patches-reviewing, or on the >> contrary for all non-patch-related discussions that usually clutter >> the -devel list. > > I think that the developer list is for development, and that includes > patches. > > I also think that "Signed-off-by" tends to work somewhat more formally > than "LGTM" does. > I agree with this -- we have no mechanism for formal signing off. Having a mechanism for signing off might help with our reviewing process. >> I've been reading (actually, discovering) the CG over the past few >> weeks, and I have to say it seems quite complete and up-to-date to me. > > It does not help with explaining the internals of Lilypond all too much, > but then nothing does right now. > In my opinion, the lack of a clear explanation of the internals of LilyPond is the biggest obstacle for getting started in development. >> On a personal note, I'm sorry for not having been more available this >> year. I can't wait to work on LilyPond again! > > In a healthy project, contributors come and go. If you instead only see > the same faces leaving and returning, something is amiss that makes > starting to contribute hard. Yes, this is true. In your opinion, what are the top 3-5 things that make starting to contribute hard? Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
