From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from www.xora.org.uk ([80.68.91.202] helo=xora.vm.bytemark.co.uk) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OoxzZ-0006Lr-Ow for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:25:10 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xora.vm.bytemark.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 473C21C0B8 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:24:42 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at xora.vm.bytemark.co.uk Received: from xora.vm.bytemark.co.uk ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (xora.vm.bytemark.co.uk [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 556P1ASxNA0l for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:24:41 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.1.119] (188-220-34-37.zone11.bethere.co.uk [188.220.34.37]) by xora.vm.bytemark.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CC6BDA5EEE for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:24:41 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4C77AE8B.80607@xora.org.uk> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:24:43 +0100 From: Graeme Gregory User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100720 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.68.91.202 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: dp@xora.org.uk X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: [RFC] review process X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:25:10 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 27/08/10 13:15, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > 1. If a patch does not get any review feedback in X weeks time; it is > ok to apply it. People who need more time to review a patch can > mention that in a short reply. In that case they are granted Y more > weeks to review. > (suggestion: X = Y = 2) I have always been a supported of apply it and see who screams. I have suggested before that after 2 weeks without review any non core patch is obviously OK. G