On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl@gmx.net> wrote:
Am 31.01.2011 21:45, schrieb techtonik@gmail.com:
There is no b.p.o issue as it's not a bug, but a tiny copy/paste patch to clean up the code a bit while I am trying to understand how to add Python to the PATH.
I see no reason for b.p.o bureaucracy. Mercurial-style workflow [1] is more beneficial to development as it doesn't require switching from console to browser for submitting changes. This way tiny changes can be integrated/updated more rapidly.
The tracker is not bureaucracy, it's how our development process works.
Don't you want to improve this process? Code review system is a much better place to review patches than mailing list or bug tracker. Especially patches that are not related to actual bugs.
I know that Mercurial uses a different process, with patches always going to the mailing list and being reviewed there, but that would be way too much volume for python-dev considering our number of patches.
Seems reasonable. Do you have any stats how many patches are sent weekly and how many of them are actually integrated?
BTW, you should be able to send emails to report@bugs.python.org in order to create new issues, and attachments will automatically become attached to the bug reports.
Thanks. I'll keep this in mind. -- anatoly t.