[Mailman-Developers] Mailman 2.x Roadmap
barry at list.org
Mon Jan 5 20:07:25 CET 2009
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Jan 5, 2009, at 1:19 PM, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Monday 5 January 2009 17:09, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>> Please don't start (or extend) a list of downstream things to look at
>> in the week before a release. First of all, I'm just compulsive
>> to actually look, but even so, the most likely result is I'll be
>> overwhelmed, defer everything and then forget about it.
> I have on behalf of Debian a while ago reported a number of our
> patches to the
> SF.net tracker, which have not seen any response yet. It's not that
> we're not
> willing to contribute patches back, but the previous approach of
> them to the patch tracker hasn't been fruitful. I have also sent
> patches to the development list in the past with the same result.
> So I guessed I'd try something different instead.
>> If downstream patches are of general applicability or address bugs in
>> the upstream distribution, they should be reported in the upstream
>> tracker (currently <https://bugs.launchpad.net/mailman>).
> Do I understand it correctly that I should resubmit the patches to
> this new
> We're quite willing to help you get useful patches integrated, but
> our time is
> also limited so I'm looking for the way that is most effective for
> both of
I'll let Mark determine what works best for him an MM2.x, but a couple
of comments: first, the SF tracker issues /should/ have been migrated
to Launchpad. If not, it'll be quicker to resubmit them.
Second, I think in general if you can push bug fix branches to
Launchpad and link them to the bug, they will be much easier to review
and merge into the official branches. Patches in a tracker are more
difficult to use, but probably easier to generate. You could also try
'bzr send' to create a bundle, which is somewhere between a branch and
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Mailman-Developers