in reply to pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea)

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"?

  • Comment on Re: pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea)
by crazyinsomniac (Prior) on Mar 12, 2003 at 16:18 UTC
      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.


        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