Hello Jacob and everyone.
On 09/29/2010 09:59 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
Starting today, we're going to be making some minor but significant changes
to the way the Django core committer team "does business."
That's about time :-). Congratulations and thank you!
I have a comment and a suggestion:
This new process allows a proposal to be carried if:
* There are at least 3 "+1" votes from core committers.
* There are no "-1" votes from core committers.
* A BDFL hasn't issued a ruling on the issue.
This doesn't explain what's one is supposed to think in situation when a
proposal is ignored by core devs, which may happen for all sorts of
reasons. I suspect that "less than 3 +1 votes" means the same as any -1
vote but I think that an explicit clarification would be nice.
---
My suggestion is about this unfortunate ticket status -- 'Accepted'.
This now works as a sort of a dusty shelf: when anyone of the core team
looks at the patch and decides that there's nothing wrong with it he
puts it on that shelf where the ticket has all the chances to lie for
months or even years. And if the author of the patch tries from time to
time pitching it to get it into trunk he can easily fall into all sorts
of "not-a-good-times": conferences, feature freezes, hot discussions on
other topics etc.
My proposal is simple: 'Accepted' status shouldn't exist. If the patch
is good it should be committed right away. If it's not there have to be
an explanation why it needs improvement or why it's going to be
wontfixed. Simple waiting doesn't really improve quality of the patch.
What do you think?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django
developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
