On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> What's wrong with a patch submitter submitting a patch to a tracker, > >> but then emailing the list for actual discussion? > > What's what we have today with the wiki. We don't need any special software > to > do that. It does require some patch queue maintainer(s) to make sure things > get added or updated.
Right, which is what a tracker gives you. A patch submitter can stick a patch up as WIP or whatever, and update it to ready-for-commit-review when they're ready, and it's easy to get a list of ready-to-review patches. If someone wants a patch to get reviewed in a commit fest, then it better have the latest version and an up-to-date status. I don't think getting submitters to follow the rules will be very hard - as someone pointed out it's trivial compared to the effort of writing a patch. The problem is more likely to be cleaning up old patches that people submit that never make it to prime time, but that's easier work for non-core people to help with. Anyway, I've said my piece and I don't want to discourage movement to a wiki - it seems a vast improvement in submitter-participation over the status quo. I just think there are even better tools for the job. Cheers Tom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
