From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1GF9c6-0001z9-5s for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:14:46 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GF9c3-0001wA-Rd for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:14:43 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GF9c1-0001u2-0R for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:14:42 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GF9c0-0001tq-QP for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:14:40 -0400 Received: from [69.90.100.5] (helo=titanium.v3.ca) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1GF9jO-0007c0-Q7 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:22:19 -0400 Received: from titanium.v3.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by titanium.v3.ca (8.13.2/8.13.2/Debian-1) with ESMTP id k7LDEbje023155 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 06:14:37 -0700 Received: (from jbailey@localhost) by titanium.v3.ca (8.13.2/8.13.2/Submit) id k7LDEXrY023154 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 06:14:33 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: titanium.v3.ca: jbailey set sender to jbailey@raspberryginger.com using -f Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 06:14:33 -0700 From: Jeff Bailey To: The development of GRUB 2 Message-ID: <20060821131433.GA22729@titanium.v3.ca> References: <871wrjhrks.fsf@night.trouble.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <871wrjhrks.fsf@night.trouble.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i Subject: Re: Let core developers "vote" to accept patches. X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:14:44 -0000 On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 12:37:23AM +0200, Johan Rydberg wrote: > In other projects that I've worked on, we've used a system where the > core developers can either give a +1 or a -1 on a contributed patch. > If a patch receives two +1's or more, it is accepted (if there are no > -1's) and committed by one of the developers. Do the core devs and maintainers not feel empowered to just commit the patch if they would otherwise +1 it? It seems like grub is a sufficiently small project that moves sufficiently slowly that rolling back a contentious patch would be easier than any sort of beaurocratic overhead. Tks, Jeff Bailey -- I do not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. - Voltaire