On Monday 25 September 2006 04:36, Robert Shearman wrote:
Robert Lunnon wrote:
- Adapt the patch acceptance process to create a right of appeal where a
patch can be proven to be within the Patch Acceptance policy. Appeal should be independent of and binding on Alexandre - this eliminates one-to-one arguments about patch acceptability while still providing good excellent control. It will also have the effect of reducing Alexandres workload.
I think this process would be completely redundant, so can you give an example of the patches that would meet the "Patch Acceptance policy" but have been rejected by Alexandre?
I could (If there were a patch acceptance policy) but it'd be pointless at this point.
BTW, you already have a right to appeal - it's a message to wine-devel with a well-reasoned argument.
Ah yes, but is it independent... There is a single acceptance channel, this is poor system design.
Bob