On 01/07/11 17:08, Itamar Turner-Trauring wrote:
In order to have at least some anecdotal evidence --
If you've submitted a patch to Twisted (or started a branch) and it never made it in, how did that happen? I imagine reasons might include a review request to write tests, redesign requests, getting distracted, "it works for me", design discussions that never got anywhere... What happened in your case?
I have submitted patches that went nowhere:
Some of them seemed to be:
"No, don't do it this way, do it that way". I'll be honest, that's just completely demoralising, when you're contributing new functionality.
On that topic, I don't think the Twisted process is as accessible as some of you guys think it is I'm afraid. I found the discussion about the IPv6 tickets a bit disheartening :o(
However, more constructively (less whiney!) some tickets languished in "make these tiny cleanups" and that's just incredibly painful in the current setup, with SVN and Trac mediating things.
I've got absolutely no interest in pulling SVN head, writing a patch, submitting it as an attachment via Trac and *then* being told "ok, I've created this branch. Go off and learn how to do branches in a crappy old centralised VCS, and in a way compatible with UQDS, re-do your patch in a branch, then send another diff in as a file"
Really? I mean, come on guys...
If it were git/github, then I'd simply make the incremental changes in my local git branch, re-push to github and re-submit the pull request.
I hate Launchpad, but I'm sure it's equivalent beats the crap out of SVN.
Please, for the love of god, adopt a DVCS which lets contributors develop continuously against a local branch and push changes!