Re: patch tracking

[Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>]

On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 02:02:54PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> I have not decided whether the tracker should generate one big nag
> message per week, or follow up to each individual thread.  The former
> would be less obnoxious, but then obnoxiousness is kind of the point.

How about individual messages to the people privately, and one big summary
to the list?  If I were to receive N nag messages, it would be easier to
delete each message as I review the patch.  With a big summary, I must
remember which ones I have since reviewed; with individual nags, I can
simply look at which messages remain in my mailbox.


Although I must point out that the problem of patch queuing has been solved
before.  I strongly recommend adopting something used on sourceforge or
mozilla or whatever for GCC's purposes.  Else we're right back where we
started:  people needing to be freed up for patch review (Zack) are getting
stuck with other duties (writing patch queuing nagging programs).  Granted,
Zack's doing this already on his own, but it made a good example. *grin*


Phil

-- 
Would I had phrases that are not known, utterances that are strange, in
new language that has not been used, free from repetition, not an utterance
which has grown stale, which men of old have spoken.
                                     - anonymous Egyptian scribe, c.1700 BC