Em Tue, May 25, 2004 at 07:42:06PM +0200, maximilian attems escreveu:
| > | will try to release on weekly/10days base.
| >
| > Why not 5 days ? Are you too busy ? Maybe, we can have a
| > maintainer per week (five utils days).
|
| hmm that would mean in 4 days from now,
| sure i'm on university and should pass exams primarily..
I have the some problems... :-)
| i may do that from time to time, but we don't produce that
| many patches that it makes sense to me.
Hummm, yes you right. Actually, there are times where we
produce a lot of work... But is not always...
| > I have a suggestion here. Why not apply the patch _even_
| > it does have a simple objection ? Of course, if a Mantainer
| > says "don't", that's ok to drop. But if the patch is
| > generating a discussion, it could be applyed.
| >
| > What do you think ?
|
| the primarily goal of kjt should be to collect patches
| that are suitable for the official kj release from acme.
Ok.
| most objection on the kj mailing list are pretty funded.
| but you are right that the rules for kjt shouldn't be too tight.
Yes, its my suggestion...
| > | +string_form_drivers
| > | From: Luiz Fernando Capitulino <lcapitulino@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| > | +keyboard_ptr_to_string
| >
| > I'm wondering about this patch, it is still alive !
| >
| > It was my first patch in Janitors, does have about one year...
|
| /me laughs
| yeeah, i know mine above is not much better,
| they are still not merged, but we had that double check of size
| by domen puncer, that was quite wired, he got bigger sizes by them.
| (he used a red hat machine with gcc 3.3.3, if i remember correctly)
| so i don't know if those should really be pushed.
I don't remember the gcc version I used to test the patch, but will
review it.
--
Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino
<http://www.telecentros.sp.gov.br>
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
|
