Patch Pilot report

[Robert Collins]

On Mon, 2009-11-23 at 17:23 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> 
> I'm not sure I like the sound of that.  My understanding was that the
> patch pilot was supposed to help less experienced and/or one-off
> contributors to deal with the relatively technical aspects (proper
> docs and tests, for example).  That may be a misunderstanding, but you
> see where I'm going: if one is needed to get regulars past the
> Charybdis of PQM and the Scylla of committers too busy to review,
> there's a constricted bottleneck that needs shattering. 

Perhaps. Alternatively, consider that there is a learning curve which
once passed is not a problem to work with, and helping folk up the curve
can lead to either more contributions from the same person, or us
actually getting the benefit of a one-off contribution from them.

The learning curve [in terms of things-we-need-to-accept-a-patch] we
have covers:
First time only:
- copyright assignment
Non-committers:
 - tests
 - docs
 - codebase (structure, where to do things)
 - 2 reviews other than author
Committers:
 - 1 review other than author
 - PQM

PQM isn't encountered by any casual contributor; code review is
encountered by everyone.

-Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20091123/8a444738/attachment.pgp