[Spice-devel] Proposal: review branches (was Re: [vdagent-win PATCH v6 2/5] Initial rewrite of image conversion code)

[Christophe Fergeau]

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 07:20:23PM +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 07:09:22AM -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > > 
> > > > >>> I see several benefits to doing this:
> > > > >>> 
> > > > >>> 1. We always know exactly which component and branch is being patched
> > > > >>> 
> > > > > 
> > > > > As long as contributor keep pinging or resending his series, this is
> > > > > already the case.
> > > > 
> > > > As Frediano said at the beginning of the series, “I’m tired of hearing this
> > > > reply”.
> > > 
> > > And this is not an actionable answer... My perception is that there
> > > rarely are 'ping' on old series. Does this mean we are doing a good job
> > > at reviews? (I doubt it or we would not have this conversation) Does
> > > this mean patch senders do not want to do that? Why? Does this mean it's
> > > done a lot, but to no avail? All I'm reading is "I'm not happy with how
> > > things work", with nothing specific.
> > > 
> > 
> > Patch series are getting old (even years) repeatedly pinged (5/6 times)
> > but they continue to not getting any feedback/ack/comment.
> > If you can't remember any... this just confirms the problem.
> 
> So I went through my mails (searched for mails containing 'ping'), in
> the last months

Forgot a number here, it's since April 2016, so in the last 15 months or so.

> I found 24 series which needed a ping, among these, 3
> needed several pings, and it stopped at 2 pings. Maybe I missed some.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/attachments/20170725/c5782dc1/attachment.sig>