Re: rfc: trivial patches and slow deaths?

[Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>]

On 08/20/2013 07:22:36 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 19:10 -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > The important question is does he want to handle patches that you're
> > flipping out about not going in before the next merge window because
> > they are SO IMPORTANT that the trivial tree must promote them out of
> > sequence.
> 
> You're misreading.  I see no flipping out here.
> 
> I'm simply saying that obvious defects should be
> corrected sooner rather than later.
> 
> I'm also saying that the trivial tree should
> have some visibility about whether or not a
> patch or series will be handled by the trivial
> maintainer or not.

I fetch his git and look at the log of the branch to see which of the  
documentation patches I forwarded are there. That said, there's no  
guarantee they'll go in from there because other maintainers often grab  
them and put them in through their trees.

> Jiri has not responded to this point.

He did. Twice.

> Silence about the status of patches that extends
> for months is not good.

He has a public git tree. It's listed in his MAINTAINERS entry. I've  
found that if a patch isn't in there, he hasn't picked it up yet. (I've  
been feeding Documentation patches through his tree, hence my interest  
in this thread.)

Rob