<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><div class="Ih2E3d" style="color: rgb(80, 0, 80); ">On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 6:16 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <<a href="mailto:martin@v.loewis.de" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 204); ">martin@v.loewis.de</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex; ">
<div>> Is there any easy way that the burden of trunk -> py3k<br>> merging could be moved to the original committers of<br>> the trunk patches?<br><br></div>I'm not sure I understand the question. If the committer<br>
of the original patch would do the merge himself, then<br>certainly the burden would be on him, and that's an easy<br>way.<br></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Yes, that's all I meant: make it the committer's job</div>
<div>to merge or block as appropriate. I just wasn't sure if</div><div>there was some reason that this would be difficult or</div><div>undesirable.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm not suggesting that this be enforced (mechanically</div>
<div>or otherwise); just that it might be worth considering</div><div>instituting a policy to encourage individual committers</div><div>to take responsibility for forward porting their commits.</div><div><br></div><div>Mark</div>
<div><br></div></span>