Hi,
On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote:
On 5/12/2014 20:49, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote:
I commit PR patches that are 6 to 18 months old fairly frequently.
There is obviously a huge backlog but many PRs are processed daily. The
PRs that aren't getting processed quickly are "[NEW PORT]" PRs (and
apparently anything mentioning fuse-fs for some reason). A staging PR
is going to jump the line; it has a higher priority.
Why would you even entertain the idea that a staging PR will fall
between the cracks?
Perhaps the better question is: what are the factors that will make
committers shy away from a PR, even if it's summary contains stage? [1]
Maybe we (maintainers) can do better?
[1]
Heh, 54 out of 2000+ PRs isn't too bad. :)
Ok..2000 ports PR's open at given time on how many committers? Starting
to look like Kurt has the right idea here.
I doubt most cases are people intentionally passing over an ugly PR. I
am sure it happens but staging is generally straightforward so the PR
itself isn't going to scare someone off.
Well, mine (ports/188901) I can see why someone walks around it, cause
the patch is >1MB and needs to be downloaded. The bulk is of course the
giant plist introduced by staging (and we can blame Zend for a
file-intensive boilerplate heavy framework, but that's another topic).
However, I don't see a way to make it more attractive, which is why I
asked.
--
Melvyn
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
