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

[Zebediah Figura]

On 24/07/18 20:49, Vincent Povirk wrote:
> My take is that code can be "good enough" to go in, but also not be
> what the maintainer wants. You're not responsible for predicting that,
> nor will you generally have the knowledge and experience they have.
> However, being able to take feedback and adjust your approach is
> highly valued here.
> 

I guess I have a hard time seeing where the difference falls between the
two. Besides, it seemed that Alexandre wanted to make it clear that a
sign-off means a patch is good enough in every respect—legal, stylistic,
correctness.

> I know I've made my share of dumb mistakes that ended up in submitted
> patches, and occasionally in Wine. You're never going to be 100%
> certain, just do your best.
> 
> I would like to suggest that maybe we as a community should stop
> talking about "Julliard rank". While I'm sure he considers your
> history when reviewing patches, it sounds like the way that's
> discussed creates undue anxiety. And it's overemphasized IMO, the
> quality of your work is what ultimately matters. (I ALSO would like to
> continue to suggest that we put in systems to make sure everyone's
> patches get reviewed.)
> 
> 

I guess "Julliard Rank" is just a dumb code word for "Alexandre's level
of trust", and it's observable enough that a name had to be invented for
it. And how much a maintainer trusts you affects how much patience
they're willing to give to reviewing your patches (or answering your
questions, I guess). Which is something that I can't help but feel
concerned about. But I guess that concern just boils down to "I submit
poor-quality patches and I'm concerned about receiving deferential
treatement", which is not really something that can or should be helped.