GNU bug report logs -
#61894
[PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
Previous Next
Reported by: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 16:14:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Done: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #11 received at 61894 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Wed, 01 Mar 2023 17:15:26 +0000
Christopher Baines <mail <at> cbaines.net> wrote:
> I guess I'm still a team sceptic, I think the idea is interesting and
> I have added myself as a member of some teams. But the main impact on
> me so far is that I've just been getting some unwanted personal email,
> messages that previously wouldn't have landed in my inbox have been
> doing so.
>
> Regarding this change specifically though, I'm unclear how it would
> impact the things I push for others. I pushed some patches today,
> would this mean that I'd have to look at what team/teams are involved
> (according to /etc/teams.scm.in) for each commit/series, and then
> either continue if I'm a member of that team, or skip it if I'm not?
I'm on Chris' side. We need less burden to review/push, instead of more
formal rules/obligations.
Speaking about me, I'm in the Java team, where my knowledge is best, but
in the past I also "wildered" in the Python and Ruby areas. I think
I always tried to be cautious with my reviews though: If I saw it was
just a simple version update with no dependency changes, and it
builds/runs afterwards, I gave an OK and/or pushed it, although I'm not
the super-expert. If it was too hot for me, I left my fingers from it or
asked a known expert for help.
"Teams" are a nice hint (for example, adding a tag to the bug entry),
but I wouldn't make it too formal.
Björn
[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 44 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.