On 9/13/2010 6:27 PM, Jeff Trawick wrote: > > I've seen you and somebody else say that, so I'll stop. At the same time I > will point out > that
Coulda been me before (on a different patch issue) > * Sometimes people without commit access ask for something to be backported, > possibly even > with a patch to STATUS. Where better for the request to live a couple of > days down the > calendar when the request has scrolled off the first screen of most in-boxes? Not disagreeing, but someone should pipe up in support of the patch if it will rest here... hard to determine what is in the 'going nowhere' category since we don't actually date stamp the text file entries. > * Updating STATUS and finding a place to host a patch for a security > backport, even before > reviewing/testing it properly, serves as a good reminder that something needs > to be done > and gets a bit of bookkeeping out of the way. Additionally, multiples of us > have already > reviewed and tested patches for backport to our own private trees and know > exactly what > should work. One could just as well ask on dev@ "Hey, is it really this > simple for 2.0" > or whatever, or cut to the chase and update STATUS since it has to be there > anyway. I'm happy with moving this to showstoppers, all things considered.
