> Guido> Or is there a better idea? Should I forward all patches I > Guido> get to python-dev? To a separate list? > > Probably a separate list. xemacs.org runs a xemacs-patches mailing > list with a replybot on it that scans for patches. It sends back a > different response based on whether it finds a patch or not. Then > there's a group of lieutenants that keep an eye on the patches and > work out their applicability. We could set something like that up > fairly easily. This sounds like a useful idea. It should also check for the disclaimer text and send an appropriate apply if a patch is found without a disclaimer. Of course, the replybot would need to be smart enough to find things like patches hiding in BASE64-encoded attachments... On the other hand, perhaps it would be better to deal with patches the same way as with bug reports -- the Jitterbug database isn't perfect, but it makes it possible to check regularly whether something has been dealt with or not, much better than a simple mailing list. (There are already lieutenants scanning the bugs traffic, so that part doesn't change.) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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