-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:45 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> As far as the Wiki page is concerned, it would be good to make sure the
> entries have a bit more info than just a header line -- things such as
> "author", who reviewed and what did the reviewer say about it.
>
In a wiki context, this sort of thing has got "Template" written all
over it. I've done a little editing on Wikipedia, so I've got some
idea about how to make wiki Templates work. I'm not claiming to be an
expert, but if nobody else has a particular yen for it, I can have a
go at setting up some simple templates to make it easier to add a
"patch" or a "review" in a structured way.
> Lastly, I would say that pushing submitters to enter their sent patches
> into the Wiki worked -- we need to ensure that they keep doing it.
>
+1. Although I wouldn't say that there has yet been a "push" for
submitters to enter their patches into the wiki =) I've started
adding my own patches to the wiki recently. The only thing about the
process that sucks is that I need a URL linking to the message in the
archives. I naturally want to add my patch to the wiki immediately
after sending my email to -patches, and it takes some material
interval of time for messages to show up on the archive. My solution
was to just pull the message ID out of the headers in gmail and fudge
the URL. So the URL I add to the wiki is actually borked until the
archives refresh themselves, which is less than awesome ...
Apart from the archive linkage thing, I found the process of queueing
my own patches smooth, straightforward and satisfying. I would
recommend it to other submitters, if for no other reason than to
reduce the amount of drudge work the core team has to do to keep
things in order.
Cheers,
BJ
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org
iD8DBQFIA5Jl5YBsbHkuyV0RAnL0AJ97+ZdXr71Xu6wMSlVGSvy1t4WqbgCgz58X
GHMaO7j4g8+WTmcNx2SKBnA=
=xPJ3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
