Nick Sabalausky: >Automatically accepting all submissions immediately into the main line with no >review isn't a good thing either.<
I agree with all you have said, I was not suggesting a wild west :-) But maybe there are ways to improve the situation a little, I don't think the current situation is perfect. A better revision control system like Git or Mercury (they are not equal, but both are good enough) will be an improvement. ------------------ Caligo: > Perhaps using a modern SCM like Git might help? Everyone could have (and > should have) commit rights, and they would send pull requests. You or one > of the managers would then review the changes and pull and merge with the > main branch. It works great; just checkout out Rubinius on Github to see > what I mean: https://github.com/evanphx/rubinius I agree. Such systems allow to find a middle point better than the current one between wild freedom and frozen proprietary control. Walter and few others are the only allowed to commit to the main trunk, so Walter has no risk in "losing grip on how the whole thing works", but freedom in submitting patches and creating branches allows people more experimentation, simpler review of patches and trunks, turning D/DMD in a more open source effort... So I suggest Walter to consider all this. Bye, bearophile
