Re: 8.3 pending patch queue

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



- --On Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:36:42 -0500 "Jim C. Nasby" 
<decibel@decibel.org> wrote:

> On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 12:33:38AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> Someone (you, I think) advocated a '3 weeks and then dump the rest of the
>> patches' (not quote as  strong of wording, but similar) ... why not split
>> the  patches list up:
>>
>> submitted patches, not reviewed
>> reviewed patches, needs work, waiting on author
>> reviewed patches, ready for commit.
>>
>> Once feature freeze started, the first list should only get small patches to
>> it, easily reviewed and committed ... then, focus on reviewing list A and
>> move  the patch to list B or commit it ... once list A is cleared off, we go
>> into  Beta ... if a patch on list B gets re-submitted before Beta, it gets
>> reviewed  and either committed, or punt'd to the next release ...
>
> I don't think we want to be adding anything new in beta. But if we went
> into 'alpha' when list A is cleared that might work.
>
> (BTW, it's not really clear which list "A" is...)

List A is the 'unreviewed patches list', which, on Feature Freeze, would be 
'closed' ...

Feature Freeze would last until all Patches in List A are processed, whether 
that means going back to the Author for fixes/work, or gets committed to the 
source tree ...

Once List A is cleared off, then we dive into Beta, at which point in time only 
bug fixes would be applied ...

- ----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy@hub.org                              MSN . scrappy@hub.org
Yahoo . yscrappy               Skype: hub.org        ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFGSyp14QvfyHIvDvMRAjIHAJ9MKdROk7Mh0EvcpJoJJJ4uY6iKSQCgldFS
ZAYrJ08nKewt1fZbXnXUeN8=
=Huf8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----