[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] advdomestic.c cleanup (PR#1149)

[Jason Short <vze2zq63@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:

>  --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
>
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 04:37:11PM +0000, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> >
> > > we will see.
> > > I personally think that your patch has everything: it is useful, it
> > > got +ve reviews, it even abides coding rules.  
> > >
> > > But it doesn't seem to be sufficient here.
> > Come on. You know how slow I'm. But you should be able to see how I
> > advance in the patches
> Raimar, I have a lot of respect for what you are doing.  Unfortunately
> due to you being the only one still commiting code patches from time to
> time and also due to your "won't trust any patch until I check it
> line-by-line" attitude (which is commendable but not optimal), the queue
> of patches is growing (according to my estimates).
Yes.  And when it grows, this discourages people from submitting new 
patches, which means that although the list doesn't really grow there's 
still missing potential there.
Right now there is one full-time maintainer.  With two full-time 
maintainers we could have twice as much progress - certainly enough 
patches are being supplied to support this.  After the last discussion 
of this type, I thought we'd all agreed another maintainer would be 
beneficial?
http://arch.freeciv.org/freeciv-dev-200111/msg00901.html


> > BTW: The fact nobody noticed that #1127 is broken is not a good sign.
> Personally I have -0.0 interest in city naming algorithms.  But I'm sure
> if you asked people directly, they would take their time to check it
> (although they would need to feel that not only their "no", but also
> their "yes" will count).  There were many people discussing city-naming
> and even submitting patches, init?  So you could pitch them against each
> other ;)
We need more testing of supplied patches..  There are many ways in which 
this could be worked:
1. Make a new CVS module external to freeciv.org (e.g. the SF project).
2. Make a new CVS module on freeciv.org.
3. Open up the current CVS module a bit more, and use stable branches as 
necessary.
4. Make daily snapshots from patch collections.

Personally, I am in favor of #3.  The first two choices _could_ turn out 
being even better (and may work with #3 as well), but it's difficult to 
tell whether distribution will work as planned (i.e. whether anyone will 
actually _use_ the development code).
#4 is something I just thought of.  A system could be set up so that a 
daily snapshot would be built from a collection of patches.  For this to 
work, all developers would have to be given write access to this 
repository of patches (since the patches would have to work together, 
all developers would have to be able to edit them).  The repository 
could reside anywhere (the sourceforge site is a good place, methinks), 
but using centralized distribution through www.freeciv.org would be a 
good idea.  This isn't really much different from having a separate CVS 
module, but it's more short-term in nature.
Really, there are a lot of directions we could go with this.  But 
whatever the developers decide to do, I think another maintainer is crucial.
jason