[Gnu-arch-users] Re: taglines vs explicit

[Miles Bader]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
> Miles> Occasionally I wish some of that quoted stuff would go away;
> Miles> then maybe my patches would get applied...
> 
> Of course you do; so does everybody except Linus (and probably there
> are days when Linus does too).

My complaint was intended to be vaguely amusing (oh ho ho), but in fact
I often get the impression that the reason for my annoyance is _not_
Linus exercising maintainerly discretion about a dodgy patch, but rather
that he's still somewhat overwhelmed by the amount of incoming info;
even with BK it's rather hairy being a human patch queue at the eye of
the storm...

After all, 99% of my patches are specific to my particular (uncommon)
architecture, for which I'm the maintainer, they always apply cleanly
(not surprising since those files rarely get touched by other than me),
and they usually _do_ get applied without comment after I resend them
3-4 times.

I expect that he _does_ still read my patches (probably he has a
gradiated scale -- Andrew Morton: read subject line, apply, Me: read
patch, probably apply, Joe Random: chuck in bin unless bored), and that
takes time, and I get the idea that the process of sorting through all
the incoming stuff is still fairly primitive -- that BK is providing a
solid foundation, but that the upper levels of the mechanism are still
run by hand and shell scripts tied together with chewing gum.

Tom's recent response about patch-queues suggests that he's in a similar
situation (albeit with less volume), he gets solid low-level support
from arch, but too much of the process is still essentially unautomated,
or automated poorly.

Well I'm not sure where I'm going with this... Maybe it's time to look
more closely at what Andrew Suffield's done with his patch queue
manager stuff (is anything available?)...

-Miles
-- 
I'd rather be consing.