David Kastrup writes:

> We would still need to _track_ patches.  A mailing list is just an
> unorganized dumping ground.

What exactly do you mean by that, and why can't we do it like linux
kernel does it?

As I understand it, the submitter keeps reworking and re-posting
until they get a sign-off and someone puts it in.

If the submitter loses interest in the patch, is that a problem?
Nothing keeps us from creating an issue in the tracker, 
adding a link to the mailing list with the latest patch.

Of course, it would be nice if submitters got lots of positive
feeback, but I fail to see how a web tool helps with that.

And, of course, you being the main developer right now, if you
like the current tools and procedures, that's cool [of course
you saw Graham's review results and take learning and discouragement
of git-cl/rietvelt etc into account].

Jan

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl  

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Reply via email to