Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Tom's idea of making a temp copy of the repo and patching that would work,
> but if you're going to do that why do a vpath build anyway?
In this case, the answer is to make sure that your patch works when
*someone else* does a vpath build.
> Regarding the idea of a list of approved patch authorisers, don't we have
> such a group now? i.e. "committers".
Right, and if committers or others are willing to put in the time
required to verify that patches aren't nasty before going onto the
blessed patch queue, the idea could quite possibly work and provide some
value. Note that all we really need to test for here is that the patch
isn't malicious; patches that are bad design or whatever are unlikely to
open security holes or fry your box. A major point of the queue is that
the appropriate committer often doesn't have the time to review the
patch right now. There might be some benefit in allowing a wider set of
contributors to bless patches as non-nasty for testing purposes, rather
than waste the limited time of qualified committers. Maybe such an army
doesn't exist, though.
Cheers
Tom
