develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from January 2011

Re: let's be stricted with maint doc changes

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Ricardo Signes
January 4, 2011 05:32
Re: let's be stricted with maint doc changes
Message ID:
* Nicholas Clark <> [2011-01-04T03:54:55]
> > I'm not ok with this idea. maint releases need to be as conservative as
> > possible. Part of making sure that happens is by requiring some checks
> > and balances before backports happen.  Opening up maint for doc
> > backports without running through the process runs directly counter to that.
> Agree. However, there are more people qualified to review (and backport)
> doc patches. So in theory, if a sufficiency of volunteers volunteer, their
> part of the work takes care of itself without slowing others down. But, you've
> done it you way - I haven't. Were you finding that all patches were "equal",
> in that a doc patch potentially took as much of your time as a C code patch?

Here's some anecdotia.

I've come across a number of "approved" commits that are not actually
cherry-picked.  It seems to me that if the commit is approved, and I'm going to
do the next release, I should pick it.  So, that adds time -- three people
wanted the commit, but not enough to pick it, so I will.  Then I find out that
it won't actually apply cleanly.  A previous commit, possibly only seconded but
not approved, is required.  So I review that and pick it to apply, then go back
to the approved commit.  Then I find that tests fail, because there's now a Pod
syntax error, which is fixed in later, not-even-requested commit.

This takes *much* longer than C code patches, which I ignore entirely.


Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About