Hi all,
What's proper etiquette for marking "patches" closed on sourceforge? Should I be closing patches when I apply them to cvsmain or assuming the proposer will do that?
cheers Miller
I think that if you include a patch, then you should mark it "Accepted" and "Closed". That is the ultimate aim of the patch tracker, so it makes sense that you would mark it thusly. Only if you actively delete a patch tracker does it go away, so there is no harm is closing one.
It would also make sense if you also used some of the other possible "Resolution" markers. In the past, the comments would make up to things like "Rejected", "Postponed", and "Later", so it would make sense if you used those as well. It seems to me that anything but "Accepted", you can leave as "Open", and let the submitter take care of it.
Happy New Year everyone!
.hc
On Dec 31, 2005, at 1:27 PM, Miller Puckette wrote:
Hi all,
What's proper etiquette for marking "patches" closed on sourceforge? Should I be closing patches when I apply them to cvsmain or assuming the proposer will do that?
cheers Miller
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
________________________________________________________________________ ____
News is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is publicity.
- Bill Moyers
Hallo, Miller Puckette hat gesagt: // Miller Puckette wrote:
What's proper etiquette for marking "patches" closed on sourceforge? Should I be closing patches when I apply them to cvsmain or assuming the proposer will do that?
I'd say, the patches should be closed by you, if accepted or rejected. Another question: Are you also going through the Feature suggestion tracker [1] sometimes? I recognized, that most of these aren't assigned to anybody. I allowed myself to add you as a possible "assign target" there as well now. ;) I hope, this is okay?
[1] http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=55736&atid=478073
Ciao
On Jan 1, 2006, at 5:08 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Miller Puckette hat gesagt: // Miller Puckette wrote:
What's proper etiquette for marking "patches" closed on sourceforge? Should I be closing patches when I apply them to cvsmain or assuming the proposer will do that?
I'd say, the patches should be closed by you, if accepted or rejected. Another question: Are you also going through the Feature suggestion tracker [1] sometimes? I recognized, that most of these aren't assigned to anybody. I allowed myself to add you as a possible "assign target" there as well now. ;) I hope, this is okay?
[1] http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=55736&atid=478073
Personally, I don't think that Miller should close "Rejected" or other patches, only "Accepted". Leaving non-Accepted patches open gives the patch submitter the opportunity to correct problems or update the patch.
.hc
________________________________________________________________________ ____
As we enjoy great advantages from inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously.
- Benjamin Franklin
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Personally, I don't think that Miller should close "Rejected" or other patches, only "Accepted". Leaving non-Accepted patches open gives the patch submitter the opportunity to correct problems or update the patch.
With "rejected" patches I meant patches, that were really *rejected*, that is, stuff that will never be accepted like e.g. a patch to remove all math objects or so. Items, that aren't accepted now, don't have to be rejected automatically. However once something really is rejected, I don't see, why it should be left in an "open" state.
Ciao
On Jan 2, 2006, at 2:33 AM, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Personally, I don't think that Miller should close "Rejected" or other patches, only "Accepted". Leaving non-Accepted patches open gives the patch submitter the opportunity to correct problems or update the patch.
With "rejected" patches I meant patches, that were really *rejected*, that is, stuff that will never be accepted like e.g. a patch to remove all math objects or so. Items, that aren't accepted now, don't have to be rejected automatically. However once something really is rejected, I don't see, why it should be left in an "open" state.
Yeah I guess that makes sense. Therefore the list will be kept fresh, without stale abandoned "Rejected" patches staying around. If someone wanted to revive a rejected patch, they can switch it from Closed to Open.
.hc ________________________________________________________________________ ____
"Information wants to be free." -Stewart Brand
Miller Puckette wrote:
Hi all,
What's proper etiquette for marking "patches" closed on sourceforge? Should I be closing patches when I apply them to cvsmain or assuming the proposer will do that?
i too think that it would be best, if you marked the patches properly. at least those patches, that are assigned to you and/or are clearly meant for the canonical version of pd.
mfg.adr. IOhannes
-
Frank Barknecht -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Miller Puckette