| 1 |
On 08/01/2013 02:11 PM, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: |
| 2 |
> The 01/08/13, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> I don't see the major difference between that and opening a bug and |
| 5 |
>> attaching the patch. Only that bugzilla allow to manage the process, |
| 6 |
>> not have leftovers, and future people can resume past discussions. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> The bugzilla thing is what makes the difference, IMHO. git-push and |
| 9 |
> git-send-email are one shoot simple commands to get things done. Having |
| 10 |
> to open the web browser, connect to bugzilla, attach the patch and |
| 11 |
> comment online is too much busy. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
You can use the command line too. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
www-client/pybugz |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
>>> With Gentoo, you have to find a mentor, officially call for |
| 19 |
>>> being a member, success the online tests, keep mentored some time. Not |
| 20 |
>>> very light and efficient... |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> Can you please suggest a different method to ensure quality? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Yes, having a few maintainers team with write access to the whole |
| 25 |
> portage tree and contributors sending patches to them or to official |
| 26 |
> package maintainers making the first review before they do the merge and |
| 27 |
> submit to the main maintainers. Something like the kernel with |
| 28 |
> the main maintainers, the lieutenants and open contributors. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Git workflow has been on the todo list for a long time, as well as |
| 32 |
review systems such as gerrit. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
It is non trivial to implement and none of it is an excuse for not |
| 35 |
contributing IMO ;) |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Those are enhancements and we are already working on it. Get your hands |
| 38 |
dirty. |
Archives