Field "Upstream Status" in patch headers

Nico R. n-roeser at gmx.net
Tue Aug 17 11:46:51 PDT 2004


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Randy McMurchy wrote:
[...]
> Stifling the submission of patches simply because they
> aren't/can't/won't be submitted upstream serves no good purpose.

If a patch has not yet been submitted by the original poster, the LFS
Patches project could/should submit it.

"Do not submit any patches to the patches project which have not yet
been submitted upstream. If you do nevertheless, and your patch is not
marked as 'Do not submit', it will be submitted upstream without asking
you."
(something similar to this)

Problems:
a) Lazy users won't submit their patches, so there is a higher burden
for our people at the patches project.
b) Many people will mark their patches as "Do not submit" without a good
reason.


Do you think there is a gain in having a status "Unable to submit" or
"Cannot submit" or similar? This would be used in case the maintainers
can't be reached, because all known email addresses bounce permanently
or because the package is orphaned. For patches with that status, one
might want to retry after a few months; perhaps someone had taken over
the project in the meantime.


By the way, is it the "Patches Project" or the "patches project"? Or
"The LFS Patches Project"???
- -- 
Nico
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBIlKbxI5uhYOGv4URAnF4AJwJcFpBKdjzupaRmgWWKQjC+cb+6wCghGbX
aYTxC6YS7KWklIK6e/3IjP8=
=4obE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the patches mailing list