2011/2/14 DJ Delorie <d...@delorie.com>: > A separate git repo would make it harder for me to review patches. > I'm much more interested in the history and discussion of the patch, > than in the actual patch itself, and if there's anything wrong with > the patch, LP/SF is a better way to manage those issues than git. >
github's pull request/code review system works pretty well for discussing a patch (https://github.com/features/projects/codereview). I also like the way Google Project hosting does code reviews, especially the voting system. I'm not sure if github has something similar. Thought I'd throw that out there, even though we should probably just stick to LP for everything since we just moved over to it. (Although I'm still unclear how to differentiate bugs and patches in the LP tracker) I think maybe what Karl was getting at was a group of "Junior" devs that commit to a repo to indicate they have looked at and agree with the patch. The senior dev, if he trusts the junior dev's judgement, issues a few git commands and the patch is in. Perhaps now that we are on LP, the ideas in this thread are more realizable: http://www.seul.org/pipermail/geda-user/2010-March/045968.html Maybe make an "official" LP tag of "vetted" or something that "junior" developers can add to a patch, allowing a senior dev to concentrate on those first, not spending on time on patches that need work. Jared _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user