Greg Noel <GregNoel@tigris.org> writes:
> On Sunday, Dec 7, 2003, at 06:34 US/Pacific, Sander Roobol wrote:
>
> > I agree, however it's not up to me to decide that. I'm subversion's
> > patch manager, and I need to make sure no patches get forgotten. The
> > issue tracker is the easiest way to store them.
>
> My position is that this patch isn't a big enough subject for an
> issue. It's so simple that if it's going to be applied at all, it
> should have been applied quickly.
And it was. I forgot to thank you after I did it. :-)
> In fact, I figured that it would be batched in with the first change
> to the documentation. Instead, there have been several changes to the
> documentation (some quite trivial) and yet my proposed change was not
> picked up. That says that there's so little interest in it that it
> will _never_ be picked up.
No, that says that this is why we have a patch manager, to ensure that
stuff doesn't get dropped. Patches aren't ignored without comment
just because they aren't interesting -- this is a busy project, and
sometimes folks don't respond about a particular thing because they
assume that surely someone else will. Enough rounds of that, and
eventually things fall through the cracks.
That's why we have Sander taking care of business (and doing a great
job, I might add). When patches find their ways into the issues
database, there's no ignoring them -- their in your face, forcing you
to at least assign them a milestone. It was because your patch was
turned into an issue that Karl saw it today, and drew my attention
toward it. And now, it's been reviewed and applied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Dec 11 02:44:16 2003