[darcs-users] 'submitted' branch
kowey at darcs.net
Tue Sep 14 18:59:51 UTC 2010
OK, so here's an update
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 11:32:30 +0100, Eric Kow wrote:
> Florent and Reinier, as active reviewers, do you have opinions to
> contribute about doing something like this in principle? How about
> Jason as a sort of reviewer emeritus (good ol' Day Job)?
Among the active reviewers:
- Ganesh proposed submitted in the first place
- Petr seems willing to try it out
- Eric is up for an experiment
- Florent is willing to bubble up an "in" matcher to his darcs list
- Reinier has Process Skeptic reservations (fear of introducing an
inefficiency), but is willing to try it out
Also: Jason has said he's filtering darcs mail (as information overload
coping, I think) and not to expect a reply in general. So while he did
raise objections to the whole adventure idea, [a] these are mostly based
on the Q2:(when is it safe to merge) and on Q1:review logistics, and [b]
well, he's not really active as a reviewer, so outreach+consultation
only go so far.
So! I'm going to create that branch tomorrow unless I hear objections.
Note that this doesn't necessarily rule out the adventure approach to
working, but it could be something to try out first and see how it goes.
PS: The whole consensus thing here isn't so much about everybody agrees,
but that folks broadly agree, and those that don't, can at least
accept the justification as being valid, and live with the
disagreement. In case of consensus-building breaking down, we reach
for voting as a last resort. Here, we didn't seem to need to.
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
For a faster response, try +44 (0)1273 64 2905 or
xmpp:kowey at jabber.fr (Jabber or Google Talk only)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the darcs-users