> Did you help move the issues forward by reviewing and testing the 
patches, or otherwise commenting?  If the multiple PRs on an issue are 
either/or, which seems better?


Thanks Terry for the reply. Are regular users supposed to keep reviewing even though the issue already has positive reviews or former change requests have been fixed and are now already "awaiting core review"?


Here, the first pull request stalled, but the second one takes over and awaits review:

- https://bugs.python.org/issue28053

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/9959

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/15058


Here, the first pull request is the bugfix which changes only 2 lines, so very little code to review. The second one adds the regression tests which were missing to show the existing issue:

- https://bugs.python.org/issue30256

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/4819

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/16341


Here, the third pull request is the most recent one, has been reviewed and is now awaiting core review:

- https://bugs.python.org/issue31171

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/3054

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/10563

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/13353


Here, the original author also has responded to change requests and asked for a review:

- https://bugs.python.org/issue35727

- https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/11538


I've just been looking through the multiprocessing module and open issues and wondered why there were some small bugs/patches not being fixed/merged. Is this the "normal" patch cycle? Does it take years for bugs to get fixed in Python, even though patches are submitted? Just asking, I realize this sounds very negative, but I don't mean to be criticizing. Doing volunteer work myself, I understand that time is valuable and not always available. But I would have thought that there was no shortage of volunteers for Python.