On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:20:10 +0100 Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-02-25 15:59 GMT+01:00 wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com>: > > I'm documenting existing practice. > > > -@subheading Always wait long enough before pushing changes > > +@subheading Always wait long enough before pushing changes to code > > actively maintained by others > > I suspect this is missing an exception for security issues if you want to > document the actual practice. I can add to the end of the subheading: Critical security issues are an exception. These can be pushed after the patch has been for 24 hours on the mailing list and the maintainer didn't respond yet, and nobody has rejected the patch. In addition, if another committer has approved the patch and acknowledged the urgency of the fix, the patch can be pushed immediately. Maybe a bit long, but should cover all bases. > > +@subheading Pushing patches without sending them to the mailing list > > +If you're the maintainer of a file, or the file is not actively maintained > > by > > +anyone, or the file is not covered by the MAINTAINERS file, you can just > > push > > +them without asking for permission, and without sending them to > > ffmpeg-devel. > > +This right only applies to developers with git push access, of course. > > > +A maintainer is considered not active if he hasn't posted a mail to > > ffmpeg-devel > > +for longer than 6 months, and hasn't pushed a patch in that time period > > himself. > > Unfortunately, there are maintainers who are happy to review patches > sent to improve their code but the files were not touched for more than > six months so they did not seem active for more than six months. So what is a reasonable method of determining whether a maintainer is reachable? The worst part is that not even "active" maintainers always respond, even if you go a timeout. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
