There's also "Pending".
On 30/07/13 04:16, Hugh McMaster wrote:
Hi everyone,
Wine patches currently have a status described in
http://source.winehq.org/patches, yet for patches with the status of 'New', the
status becomes confusing.
The legend describes 'New' status as "Patch not even looked at yet, there's still
hope...". This is ideal for new patches submitted within that 24-hour commit cycle.
But I'm finding it difficult to follow patches that remain with a status of
'New' for longer than the 24-hour patch cycle. Obviously, on the weekend,
patches are held over till Monday, so a longer lead-time is expected. During
weekdays, however, it is unclear what is happening with some patches. This,
ultimately, raises the question of timeliness.
Has the patch been looked at? If it has, the status often describes what action
was taken - committed, rejected, superseded, etc. This is fine, but some
patches remain with a status of 'New'.
Experience has told me that patches remaining with a status of 'New' are
incorrect in some way. But this is not always the case.
If the patch is incorrect, but close to being accepted, the patch's status should reflect this, by
changing to something like "Revision needed". Of course, the "Rejected" status
is also appropriate, depending on the severity of coding error.
Also, there are likely to be many times when the maintainer has not had time to evaluate
some patches. This means the patch is not new (i.e. recently submitted), but is awaiting
review. Once again, I believe the patch status should reflect this situation. The
status could be "Not yet reviewed".
In summary, the 'New' status should be reserved for patches that are actually
new.
Just some thoughts.
