Robert Lunnon wrote:
2. Adapt the patch acceptance process to create a right of appeal where a
patch can be proven to be within the Patch Acceptance policy. Appeal should
be independent of and binding on Alexandre - this eliminates one-to-one
arguments about patch acceptability while still providing good excellent
control. It will also have the effect of reducing Alexandres workload.
I think this process would be completely redundant, so can you give an
example of the patches that would meet the "Patch Acceptance policy" but
have been rejected by Alexandre?
BTW, you already have a right to appeal - it's a message to wine-devel
with a well-reasoned argument.
--
Rob Shearman
