Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> - --On Tuesday, May 15, 2007 16:33:32 -0700 "Joshua D. Drake"
> <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
>
>> If the developers were to actually take a step back and say, "Hey... instead
>> of working on these dozen different features, I should work on three and help
>> someone review another three..." We wouldn't have this problem.
>
> Isn't that the point of the feature freeze period? To put 'development' off to
> the side and spend the time reviewing what is pending?
Except at least from the patch status page, few are actually reviewing.
It seems we have dumped all our problems on a hand full of hackers.
>
> If ppl find it so inconviencing to not be able to submit patches becaus we're
> in a feature freeze, then won't that motivate them to do some review, get the
> patches cleared so that they *can* move on?
In theory yes, but see my comment above.
>
> 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.
I did that, read the whole thread. Bruce did it too ;) and Stefan (all
in slightly different ways).
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)
>
> iD8DBQFGSnuT4QvfyHIvDvMRAmelAJ90HOW3iOYMABmA41XCjJnKV2urtwCfaFTt
> nquLm5G2tVKMCH3Ld7znGQM=
> =Vl54
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
