--- On Tue, 3/8/11, IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoel...@iem.at> wrote:
> From: IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoel...@iem.at> > Subject: Re: [PD] Get list of a the arguments of a patch without using any > external? > To: pd-list@iem.at > Date: Tuesday, March 8, 2011, 9:51 AM > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 2011-03-08 06:34, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: > > > > I think a better question would be put to Miller or > Hans, or the other > > admins-- can someone please explain how the patch > review process works? > > it's very simple: > each patch is assigned to a person (well, let's assume it > is). Ok, then the problem is equally simple: the patch in question is not currently assigned to anyone. Could someone choose the "millerpuckette" option on the tracker for patch id #3170987, please? > whenever the assignee feels like it, they would browse to > sf.net and > have a look at the patches that are assigned to them (and > probably at > patches that are not assigned to them, though it seems that > they should) > if they have a good they, they eventually apply a given > patch > (considering they like how it is done), fix a given bug > (considering > they find a way to do it) or just close an invalid report. > > there is an agreement, that only miller manages the core > Pd. > (hence there are a lot of patches in the tracker submitted > by hans or me > or other "admins") > > > > Not only is the patch in question is now over a month > old with no signs > > of the review having begun, but it was submitted to > the tracker in direct > > response to a user's request for the feature. If > there's a problem > > with it there should at least be a relevant comment by > this point. > > indeed. > > here comes the usual rant (you can safely skip it, if not > in the mood): > feel free to employ one (or several) of the people > responsible for > fixing your problems. then you can define the review > process (e.g. that > people have to react on an issue within a minimum time). > you could even press them into accepting a given patch (or > to come up > with an alternative solution) > since you are interested in getting a feature into core Pd, > i suggest to > hire miller. > in the meantime you might have to accept that people have > dynamic > priorities which might not overlap with yours. > end of the usual rant. > > mfgasdr > IOhannes > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAk117h4ACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvTWkwCfVLcnqV/EGjPTwBB/1axkjWqO > mbcAoJRpq/abzebKGhZ5gJKPNz1EDRG1 > =7Tww > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@iem.at > mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list