Re: Future blog

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



Il giorno mer, 08/12/2010 alle 13.03 +0000, Andrew Haley ha scritto:
> On 12/08/2010 12:57 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
> > Il giorno mer, 08/12/2010 alle 13.45 +0200, Pekka Enberg ha scritto:
> > 
> >> I completely agree. I have Ivan's patches locally and I'm planning to
> >> go through them and resend them to the list unless he beats me to it.
> >>
> >>                        Pekka
> >>
> > 
> > If we were using mecurial we could use review board or webrew.
> 
> We could, but these just introduce extra barriers: it's very easy
> to just read a mail.  Let's not get obsessed with tools: the issue
> here is social, not technical.
> 
> Andrew.

Hi Andrew,

I don't think they introduce any other overhead than preparing the patch
itself. You just post the patch via mercurial directly rather than via
first a mailing list (and mercurial takes care of sending the mail to
the patches list), and it makes line by line review easier, so this is
no obsession.

If you think this is overkill, because the number of patches we have to
review is pretty limited, then this is a different issue and then I may
agree with you.

On the other hand, the argument "it speeds up development if we don't
have it" doesn't apply for the same reason: sadly, there's no
development going on right now anyway...

Cheers,
Mario
-- 
pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF
Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA  FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF

Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/
Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org
OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/

Please, support open standards:
http://endsoftpatents.org/




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Cryptography]     [Fedora]     [Fedora Directory]     [Red Hat Development]

  Powered by Linux