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

["Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have a serious problem with volume and topics of patches, but
luckily I'm not a maintainer so I don't have to worry and can pick
and choose things to look at from an interest standpoint :-).

I think the "maintainers" need to do several things, though.

1)  They need to vet the final submissions and include them to CVS.

2)  They need to be involved in the initial triage to select things
    that are put on the submission track, those that are just quick 
    bugfixes, and can be processed ASAP as a "break" from harder stuff,
    or the not-a-snowballs-chance-in-hell category.

3)  They need to learn how to delegate the heaviest workload between
    triage and final submission cycle so a patch can be cleaned up to
    the point where it is worth their time to review.

4)  They need to figure out how to trust or manage the people they 
    delegate to, enough to not micromanage the process, or start it 
    all over again when it is in the final submission state.

The last is probably the real kicker.

For a start, maintainers should have a list of people that are willing
to commit to managing a review and cleanup cycle. This involves two
things, a real code level review and test pass, and a longer term point
role in iterating the resolution of issues. Discussion on the list
should continue, but this needn't mean half the emails are from Raimar
as the only point man for everything.

The maintainers can then allocate the review load as it comes in to 
these people rather than waiting to see who has time or inclination.
This should mean fewer maintainer cycles spent on cleanup and more
on processing. This will also better coordinate the list's efforts
to schedule and handle reviews.

You can add my name to a list of people willing to review up to 3
outstanding patches at a time. I suggest that any others that are 
willing to make a reasonable commitment to turn around an initial 
review and manage a discussion of a patch cleanup in a professional 
manner to send your names in to the powers that be.

Perhaps, this will solve some of Raimar's complaints about 1127 :-)

Cheers,
RossW
=====

At 09:08 PM 01/12/21 +0000, 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).
>
>> 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 ;)
>
>Best,
>G.
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Everything you'll ever need on one web page
>from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
>http://uk.my.yahoo.com