[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: gnome 2.9



On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 14:38 +1100, Alan Milligan wrote:
> I for one am very disappointed that I have zero control pushing my own
> agenda within Fedora.  I have four outstanding bugs and enhancements
> with patches (135657, 135659, 135660, 120635) which are completely at
> the whim RH as to when they may apply them, if ever.

Those patches are only two weeks old - given that there's no release for
at least a few months, I wouldn't be concerned that they aren't applied.

It's not at the whim of Red Hat, btw. It's up to Mihai, Adrian, and
Jeff, who no doubt appreciate the help.

There's a bugzilla upgrade in the works which will add the "patch" flag
as with gnome.org bugzilla, then we can query for all bugs with
unapplied patches and track that, which will be useful.

With externally-maintained packages, whether to apply a patch will be at
the whim of the external package owner. At least I would expect there's
never going to be any process for patches other than maintainer review.
That's afaik how GNOME or Debian or the kernel works.

> Indeed.  A quick push just means there's even less time to lobby for
> changes that have already been deferred because you were all too busy
> getting out FC3.

I bet if you charted bugzilla, more fixes and patches go in during the
bustle of getting the release out, toward the end of the process.
At the beginning of a release people tend to ignore bugzilla and work on
coding new stuff.

If you aren't familiar with the time based release process, here is a
still-fairly-accurate summary of how GNOME works:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-June/msg00041.html

The GNOME process was modeled after the Red Hat Linux process in large
part, so it isn't surprising that it's also used by Fedora.

Havoc



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]