This year's changes to the "Submitting Patches" page

[Zebediah Figura]

On 01/07/18 09:01, Alex Henrie wrote:

> - Clarify that Signed-off-by means that you think a patch is good
> enough to go into Wine (and not that you are obligated fix any
> regressions it may cause)
> 

I know that this is a terrible time to bring this up, since Alexandre is
on vacation, but I was just thinking about this and I have a concern I'd
like to know how to address. I am quite clearly not the best Wine
developer on the block, and, being aware of this, I'm not sure I
necessarily feel comfortable saying I am *confident* that many of my
patches—as I initially send them—are good enough to go into Wine. I
guess the system is sort of designed this way—Alexandre, and the other
reviewers, determine whether a patch is good enough, so it ultimately
kind of doesn't matter whether anyone else does. But it's been stated
explicitly—even at this last Wineconf—that the "standards" of the
submitter have direct bearing on their Julliard Rank, and it's obviously
in anyone's interest (especially us less proficient contributors) to
keep a high rank. And there are patches I send where I not only can't
guarantee I haven't made any accidental mistakes but am also generally
unsure that I've taken the right approach. This is a concern to me since
in my experience sending the patch as a RFC, or even trying to ask what
the right approach is, results in a response significantly less often
than I'd like. Not that I'm trying to accuse Alexandre or anyone else of
being unfairly unresponsive, but my point is that a patch with my
sign-off is more likely to get a review than one without, and of course
in the case where my approach does seem correct it can't be committed
without my sign-off.

So, what should I do about this? Am I interpreting the meaning of a
sign-off too restrictively? Or is it just a matter of living with the
consequences of being a mediocre developer? Which is understandable if
that's the case; it's just unfortunate.

ἔρρωσθε,
Zeb