On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Robert Collins
<robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
> On 26 July 2015 at 07:28, Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
>> For my part, I'm going to pick up more or less one thing a day and
>> review it, but I think it would be great if other committers were to
>> also to do this: if we had 5 of us doing 1 a day, I think we'd burn
>> down this 45 patch backlog rapidly without significant individual
>> cost. At which point, we can fairly say to folk doing triage that
>> we're ready for patches :)
>
> We're down to 9 such patches, and reading through them today there are
> none that I felt comfortable moving forward: either their state is
> unclear, or they are waiting for action from a *specific* core.
>
> However - 9 isn't a bad number for 'patches that the triagers think
> are ready to commit' inventory.
>
> So yay!. Also - triagers, thank you for feeding patches through the
> process. Please keep it up :)
Awesome!
If you're looking for something to do, the change in this patch had
broad consensus, but has been stalled waiting for review for a while,
and the lack of a final decision is leaving other projects in a
somewhat uncomfortable position (they want to match CPython but
CPython isn't deciding):
https://bugs.python.org/issue24294
;-)
-n
--
Nathaniel J. Smith -- http://vorpus.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4