Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla -> trivial patch policy?

Sandro Mani manisandro at gmail.com
Thu Jun 26 22:39:52 UTC 2014


On 26.06.2014 22:47, Jeff Backus wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com 
> <mailto:kevin at scrye.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     I'm not sure the entire group of provenpackagers would like to be
>     notified of such trivial patches waiting. Is there a group of
>     provenpackagers who would be willing to query for and apply these?
>
>
> Maybe a simple way to allow non-provenpackagers to highlight these 
> "trivial bug" patches would be via a perma-bug a-la FE-NEEDSPONSOR? 
> That way there is a centralized place inclined provenpackages can 
> check which doesn't require following a mailing list and is simple 
> enough even us n00bs can figure it out. :)
>
> I presume the implementation cost is miniscule, so might at least be 
> worth an experiment.
>
So the thing that should be avoided IMO is not defining well enough how 
the procedure should work, to avoid getting swamped with patches which 
require additional work to apply. The requirement to fill out post a 
"New Package Request" style form to the bug should allow most of the 
work to be scripted, and ideally the proven packager would just need to 
look at the patch, and if happy, fire the script.

So maybe such a policy could look something like this [1]. Contrarily to 
what I wrote initially, I think it might actually make sense to allow 
also non-packagers to file such requests, and it would provide another 
way of showing off experience which will eventually lead to one getting 
sponsored.

  Sandro

[1] 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Smani/Trivial_Patch_Policy_%28draft%29
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140627/a6b88bb2/attachment.html>


More information about the devel mailing list