| 1 |
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 13:55:55 +0200 Carsten Lohrke <carlo@g.o> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
| On Monday 12 September 2005 02:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 4 |
| > If you're not up for having your code reviewed, don't contribute to |
| 5 |
| > an open source project. No-one expects you to produce perfect code |
| 6 |
| > straight off (at least, we don't until we give you commit access). |
| 7 |
| > We *do* expect you to be prepared to respond to constructive |
| 8 |
| > criticism and improve your code. |
| 9 |
| |
| 10 |
| Personally I think you're just going a bit wild by closing the bug |
| 11 |
| reports as wont fix and expecting users to fix them. That's part of |
| 12 |
| developers job, if someone takes into account adding an ebuild to the |
| 13 |
| official tree, isn't it?! |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Stuff assigned to maintainer-wanted has no developer. From what we've |
| 16 |
seen in the past, most of those ebuilds are pretty unlikely to ever get |
| 17 |
a developer either. The easiest way to improve those ebuilds' chances |
| 18 |
of getting into the tree is by getting them up to a good enough |
| 19 |
standard that whoever picks them up is very unlikely to have to do |
| 20 |
major extra work on them. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
| While I can understand your motivation, I'd |
| 23 |
| like to know if your doing is backed up by at least an informal |
| 24 |
| decision (didn't follow the threads which resulted in the maintainer* |
| 25 |
| aliases, etc.), because we have enough whining guys, who don't |
| 26 |
| understand that our ressources are limited. Caring for the quality of |
| 27 |
| stuff, that is not part of the official tree is only bad PR, but not |
| 28 |
| a win for us, imho. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
It was discussed on this list. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) |
| 34 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
| 35 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |
Archives