Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: idea for formalising committal of new features.
Re: idea for formalising committal of new features.
From: Frank Gevaerts <frank_at_gevaerts.be>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:19:02 +0200
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 06:00:18PM +1000, Jonathan Gordon wrote:
Yes, there's not much we can do about that I think, except possibly
> 2) every patch will have someone saying this maybe isnt a good idea
This is also true for any other commit that doesn't go through the patch
> 3) most of the patches everyone is indifferent to, but we dont want to
True, but I don't think that will happen anyway.
> 4) author hasnt given us his full name, patch is ready to go otherwise
Or related reasons, e.g. FS#4755 (the wikipedia viewer) where the patch
Maybe we could add some statuses to flyspray to reflect this (and
> 5) patches are still a bit of a pain to actually commit (download,
Is that really the case? I've never seen that as a real problem
-- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. KernighanReceived on 2010-08-24
Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew