[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 2/2] zeroconf: Fix pa_mainloop_api_once usage

[Arun Raghavan]

On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 14:29 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 14:10 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 15:44 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 20:45 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 21:06 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 18:16 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> > > > > > We need the mainloop lock to be taken around pa_mainloop_api_once() to
> > > > > > prevent an assert due to the defer event creation and setting of the
> > > > > > destroy callback not being performed atomically.
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > 
> > > > > No comments, so pushed both of these out now.
> > > > 
> > > > I would appreciate it if you gave a bit more time to comment on patches.
> > > > FWIW, I wait for a week on my patches before pushing due to lack of
> > > > comments.
> > > 
> > > I think we should decrease that cycle and try to not have a long lag
> > > between writing a patch and pushing it. The commits list provides a good
> > > mechanism to check anyway.
> > 
> > I don't do and I don't plan to do any in-depth reviews for the commits
> > list mail. Is it really such a big problem for waiting for a week before
> > pushing? It's a short time, after all, compared to what non-maintainer
> > contributors often have to wait.
> 
> I should clarify that the biggest issue with pushing the patches was
> that you said "no comments, so pushed both of these out now". Waiting
> for a day is not nearly enough for coming to the conclusion that there
> aren't any comments coming. If you had said "these changes look so
> trivial to me that I'll push these without review", it would have looked
> better.

Well, that (no comments + it's minor) was my intention. I do give larger
changes longer to get looked at.

-- Arun