Re: pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea)

[JayBonci]

I don't think it's a really hot idea. Sure patches get taken up slowly, but I think that's because of a) problems with the patch mechanism, and b) not all patches are a great idea.

I don't think patches should automatically be approved. This overextends the boundaries of what pmdev is here for. We are here to provide suggestions, and patches, to spot bugs, etc. Making us a 1/5th god doesn't really make it the right idea.

A better idea might be to add commenting to patches so that they can be discussed, rather than the dogpile method in the wikis. Any god can just make a change (you don't need two or whatever). If we want to throw our two cents in under a patch to say "yeah I tested this" or "this idea sucks", then that might be more organized, than some kind of automatic approval system.

The security problems inherent there would make me itchy. Or are you talking about "needs 5 votes to be presented for application"?

    --jaybonci

[crazyinsomniac]

A patchcomment nodetype is in order then (smells like a good idea to me).

A few pmdevils have become frustruated with just waiting around without any consideration/explanation of why their patches were rejected, thinking that their work is for nothing ( is it because most gods aren't that active, or whatever?).
It's a shame to have pmdevils lose interest (btw - I sympathise with the gods, it is a tough job, I know what it's like).

I say we implement patch comments regardless of how this 1/5th god idea turns out (calling all pmdevils: all this needs is a patchcomment nodetype, patchcomment display page, patchcomment edit page, and a patch for patch display page to include the patchcomments for that particular patch, and a addapatch form -- if you need help/ideas, ask away -- actually, you could get away with simply editing patch display page to include a form for creating nodes of type note, with the root_node set to that particular patch id -- which is better?).

BTW, any ideas on when the next, if any, batch of gods is coming out? (it's been so long since it's been mentioned/discussed, I completely forgot if any were scheduled to happen).

 


______crazyinsomniac_____________________________ Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most. perl -e "$q=$_;map({chr unpack qq;H*;,$_}split(q;;,q*H*));print;$q/$q;"

[JayBonci]

Honestly, another feature I'd like is the ability to release a patch's creation to be editable by pmdev. To seriously be able to collaborate on patches, it makes sense that we should be able to make "friendly" amendments to patches, without the actual patch nodes themselves stack up. This'd work well if we had patchcomments to back it up. It'd also help refine things into the best piece of code that the community could come up with. The semantics and social coordination aspect will form naturally from this collaboration.

    --jaybonci

[tye]

gods can set the patch owner to pmdev and then we can all edit together. See parselinksinchatter - (patch), for example (what I used to test before opening my mouth).

A feature to allow a patch owner to set the owner to be pmdev would be fine if someone wants to patch it in.

                - tye