Re: patchwork cleanup call

[Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 22-10-10 11:15, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2010/10/22 Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>:
>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:32:19AM +0200, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>> Nice ideas, but....
>>>
>>> As far as I see it there are two often occurring situations:
>>>
>>> - a patch is submitted for review and gets zero feedback. I have quite
>>> a few of these in patchwork. I once proposed that if a patch does not
>>> get neg feedback in two weeks or so it could be pushed anyway. While
>>> this got some positive response it was never really made a policy. But
>>> I must say I'm becoming more and more inclined to push them anyway.
>>
>> Maybe it's not written as policy but as koen said, send ping and if
>> still no reply then probably nobody cares it being pushed (so you can
>> push it).
>>
>>> - a patch is submitted by someone without commit access but no one
>>> picks up the patch.
>>
>> ping stating that author has not commit access would be nice
>>
>>> In either case if patches just get archived without being looked at,
>>> it'll probably have an adverse effects.
>>
>> Agreed
>>
>>> But we of course still have the problems that
>>> - people nak recipes but do not update patchwork
>>> - patches receive improvement suggestions and are not updated in patchwork
>>> - new versions are posted but patchwork is not updated.
>>
>> All 3 cases seems like author fault, sometimes I've contacted author for
>> patch update and never received reply :/.
>>
> 
> Guess we should make all these things more explict in the policy (I
> think there is a page how to submit patches or so).
> 
> BTW: wrt the ack suggestion from koen:
> 
> I feel it is silly to ack my own patch.

You ping your own patches
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFMwWRzMkyGM64RGpERArNnAJ9XB4aP938QOrinKBdvC8QTYwEc2ACgrNXR
0ssXMRYVQHUqRUJ+hKuwkyw=
=qj4R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----