Governance revisited (Wineconf report)

[Kai Blin]

On Sunday 24 September 2006 12:08, Ge van Geldorp wrote:

> Like I said before, I have a lot of respect for Alexandres technical
> abilities. But when I read comments in the Wineconf report about git:
> "Developers might not like it, but Alexandre does so it's a success" (did I
> mention I dislike git also???) and the inability of the Wine community to
> set up a patch management system (so patches won't disappear into the big
> void) because Alexandre refuses to use it if it won't work in Emacs I'm
> starting to wonder if people realise that the developers don't work for
> Alexandre. He's a great Benovelent Dictator on technical issues, but in my
> opinion only a Dictator on patch process management.

While we're going on about personal likes and dislikes, I like git, it saved 
me a lot of work this summer, and the ability to branch whatever I like is 
cool.

Now, getting back to the patch submission process, you're talking about a 
patch management system. How would that look like, in your opinion. We were 
discussing a couple of ideas, but in the end figured that most of those would 
slow down the submission speed of patches that are accepted.

Our idea was to have patches be recieved by the subsytem maintainers, and 
Alexandre would only apply patches he got from those guys. We voted that one 
down.

Now I would be interested in your idea for such a system. I figure that 
writing an emacs frontend won't be too troublesome if it's reasonably 
designed, so let's ignore that for now.

Cheers,
Kai

-- 
Kai Blin, <kai Dot blin At gmail Dot com>
WorldForge developer    http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developer          http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin/
--
Will code for cotton.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20060925/001ba6b1/attachment.pgp