contributions

[Emmet Hikory]

Stephan Hermann wrote:
>  1. Dev/Contributor should work as first duty on the packages he/she
>  touched the last time. Therefore, the dev/contributor don't have to
>  check for merge/sponsor bugs in the first place.

    While this is often the case, there are sometimes dependencies
between packages that mean that other packages must be merged first.
Also, depending on the focus of the individual developer, it may be
that upgrading a specific package is of significant importance towards
meeting some goal, and so efforts on that package may be prioritised.

>  2. LP is hard to track to. Regarding, that we don't have special
>  maintainers for packages, you can't track all the time the status or
>  new bugs of all packages/bugs filed at LP. Yes, it sometimes sad for
>  the contributor...but the easiest way is to go online and ping someone
>  for checking.

    This is extremely timezone dependent: it is not infrequent for
developers to be involved primarily in their personal evening (~4
hours).  This often means that during a given week, finding the
appropriate person may require that the seeker be relatively close,
and that developers in e.g. Western United States, Australia, and
Central Europe may find little active time in common.

>  I, for myself, don't check for the packages I touched last for bugs,
>  because it takes too much time...and time for bugfixing and other
>  things can be done, after I checked if the package I touched last is a
>  sync or merge...

    While I can understand that this workflow works faster for you,
I'm not certain it actually saves total time, as it seems to me that
combining all available fixes from several bugs for a single
upload/build cycle is likely less effort overall than repeatedly
updating the same package to address various reported issues.

-- 
Emmet HIKORY