Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: Patch bumping (was Re: Feature Patch: Use completion to view parameter values)
- X-seq: zsh-workers 48510
- From: Marlon <marlon.richert@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Cc: Lawrence Velázquez <larryv@xxxxxxx>, Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Patch bumping (was Re: Feature Patch: Use completion to view parameter values)
- Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:18:43 +0300
- Archived-at: <https://zsh.org/workers/48510>
- In-reply-to: <CAH+w=7bVsc0XNMuGhU4SAv7ZLj1f3_5aT+SuUtmMbMGneVq+NQ@mail.gmail.com>
- List-id: <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- References: <CAHLkEDtf6JqSn86duXjEuQFXGKJn8COcxnEypoOUV=V63SsdPQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210329073913.GP18178@tarpaulin.shahaf.local2> <CAHLkEDuHjvRhXhcX4iqZ0mJuAabcpSnRikunLeK9Y2Ucjhf0oQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210329171120.GA6044@tarpaulin.shahaf.local2> <CAH+w=7bD9bA-AKV4NoQ9YZVM_VpSMgX8GcLjSVhgP06KYokM_A@mail.gmail.com> <20210329181452.GB6044@tarpaulin.shahaf.local2> <CAHLkEDtFJbs0gUT-CD-FNBhqP6CiHqiNxbfmbhAJHLYqC+kOemail@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAHLkEDt=LnW=ytsa31TQsVEQCV6cJfD8N0PWO5iuXGcLJ-tfCA@mail.gmail.com> <18618-1617324651.844569@tLsN.0hLE.FeTt> <email@example.com> <CAH+w=7bVsc0XNMuGhU4SAv7ZLj1f3_5aT+SuUtmMbMGneVq+NQ@mail.gmail.com>
> On 12 Apr 2021, at 00:24, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> With appreciation for Lawrence's efforts, I'd respectfully request
> that the criteria for when to send a "bump" become a matter of record.
> There seem to me to be these cases:
> 1. The patch has never been reviewed or discussed.
> 2. The patch was reviewed and is acceptable, but was never applied.
> 3. There was a discussion, but it ended without resolution.
> 4. The patch was referred back to the author after review or discussion.
> There is room for subjective interpretation of "is acceptable". A
> possible resolution of #2 is that the patch is rejected after all
> (perhaps it has become obsolete in the meantime).
> I mention this mostly because I think the useful elapsed time before
> "bumping" might be different in each case. In particular #4 seems
> like it could be left considerably longer, unless the patch is fixing
> a serious bug or security issue.
I would suggest the following minimum wait times before bumping:
* To remind about an unresolved patch (not yet reviewed, not yet responded to by author after review, not yet accepted/rejected/committed, etc.):
* security issues: 2 days
* critical bug fixes: 1 week
* all other patches: 2 weeks
* Everything else: 1 month
Additionally, it would be helpful if committers remember to inform us when a when a patch has been accepted/rejected/applied, to avoid unnecessary bumps.
Messages sorted by: