bugfix patch reviewing

[Graham Percival]

Hi guys,

How much oversight should the Frog patches receive?  These patches
have been reviewed by Carl.  They compile cleanly, adhere to our
code standards (to the extent that Carl understands them), and
appear to fix the bug.

I see three proposals:
1)  Let Carl commit whatever patches he has reviewed.

2)  Require that each patch be reviewed by a "Core developer"
(Han-Wen, Jan, or Joe).

3)  Let Carl commit whatever he's fairly certain is good, and ask
for help with whatever he doesn't understand.  If somebody like
Werner or Reinhold says "sure, looks ok", then he goes ahead and
commits.


I would *really* like the turnaround to be 3 days or less.  One of
the reasons that GDP worked so well is that contributers received
prompt feedback; it's very disheartening to have your work waiting
in limbo for a week.

I know that option #2 with a 3-day turnaround places more burden
on the core developers, but I'm hoping that it would be worth it.
After a few months of being the FrogMeister, Carl should be
familiar enough with lilypond that he can approve + commit simple
patches on his own.  By the end of GOP, we should have enough
people knowing enough about lilypond that we should be safe from
the dreaded open source "Getting Hit By A Bus(tm)" phenominum.

(aside: a quick google search reveals that this phrase is common
in North American businesses.  The first time I heard it was from
Linus Torvalds, so I assumed it was an open-source thing.)

Cheers,
- Graham