On 9 March 2010 18:23, DJ Delorie <d...@delorie.com> wrote: > >> If developer cycles is the bottle neck, the only solution is to >> increase the number of active developers. > > That's what I'm trying to do - both reduce the bottleneck, and make it > easier to add more developers. >
>From my perspective, DJ is on the money with: > We need a way for people to enter the pcb development arena. except I'd substitute "gEDA" for "pcb". I know what I want to do with gEDA, but the sheer scale of the codebase is intimidating and cooperating on patch triage/approval would be a way to actively change that. In a project of this scale, there will *always* be a hierarchy of developers. Whether that hierarchy is implicit or explicit is up to us. If we want to trial this model, I'm personally happy to become one of the "second-class developers" as Kai-Martin put it - to do some patch triage for gEDA tools in general, not just pcb. Gareth _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user