contributions

[Morten Kjeldgaard]

> Jordan Mantha wrote:
>
>> My feeling is that the best way to help make sure this kind of thing
>> doesn't happen is to have *one*, canonical place to track merges.  
>> Launchpad
>> bugs seems to be the best way we have of doing that currently.  
>> Basically,
>> file a merge bug if you're going to be working on a merge and  
>> *all* people
>> working on merges, including MOTU sponsors, should be looking  
>> *first* to
>> see if somebody has already filed a bug before working on it.

I agree with Jordan. Using LP to track the progress of merges is the  
only realistic way to go if we are to avoid that people are  
duplicating efforts, and that MOTUs short-circuit the endeavors of  
contributors.

ScottK wrote:

> Personally I'd find a file a bug first rule very demotivating.  One  
> more rule
> to convince me to spend my time on other things.

It _should_ be possible to write a simple CLI tool that would submit  
an email merge request to new at bugs.launchpad.net given a package name  
and -version. The script could fill in the necessary fields, assign  
the bug to the submitter, gpg-sign the message, etc. Although it may  
be a bit of a bother to some of the more proficient and experienced  
MOTUs, the reward is a greater satisfaction on the part of the  
contributors, as well as a better documentation of the merging workflow.

Another possibility is to let MoM file the merging bugs as the merges  
are processed. I can't overview the consequences of this, though.

Cheers,
Morten