On 01:38 pm, rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:15:49 +1000, Steven D'Aprano
<st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
No, of course not. There are always other reasons, the biggest is too
many things to do and not enough time to do it. If I did review
patches, would they be accepted on the strength on my untrusted
reviews?
It is very very helpful for *anyone* to review patches. Let's see if
I can clarify the process a little. (This is, of course, my take
on it, others can chime in if they think I got anything wrong.)
Someone submits a bug. Someone submits a patch to fix that bug (or add
the enhancement). Is that patch ready for commit? No. Is it ready
for *commit review* (ie: someone with commit privileges to look at it
with an eye toward committing it)? Probably not.
What makes a patch ready for commit review? The patch should:
1) conform to pep 7/8
2) have unit tests that fail before the patch and succeed after
3) have documentation updates if needed
4) have a py3k port *if and only if* the port is non-trivial
(well, if someone wants to add one when it is trivial that's OK,
but it probably won't get used)
5) if it is at all likely to have system dependencies, be tested
on at least linux and windows
This list would make a good addition to one of the cpython development
pages. If potential contributors could find this information, then
they'd be much more likely to participate by doing reviews.
Jean-Paul
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
