This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author techtonik
Recipients eric.araujo, orsenthil, pitrou, techtonik
Date 2010-06-17.12:35:16
SpamBayes Score 0.056910954
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <AANLkTil77fEqps_Y64ECNk7qn1Tvyn6yhmHxDAD_zkD8@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <1276696712.34.0.308813921281.issue9008@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
>> Conflict resolution takes a lot of time
>> and I can't afford maintaining a separate copy of Python checkout for
>> every patch
>
> Then try various hg features such as named branches, or bookmarks, or mq, or pbranch, etc.
> (or any SVN-facing tool you would like, including git-svn, bzr-svn, etc.)

pbranch is the next in my list, still do not have time to dig all these tools.
For now I have these unsolved workflow problems:
1. patches are not tied to specific bug ticket (can only be manually uploaded)
2. I would like to receive feedback on patches inline (like in Mercurial list)
3. I would like to see all the code related to patch (source, tests,
docs) in one place
4. Edit, preview and update docs patches online
5. Download patched source and test in one step, execute in the other

>> To be a maintainer I need:
> [snip]
>
> Most people in most open source projects seem perfectly content without such an artillery of sophisticated tools/gadgets.

You account only people who found they way to be able to contribute.
Most people didn't. If you can calculate an average indicator of
active Python contributors, I will say that it can be improved by 50%
only by means of well aligned toolset.

> While the workflow can always be improved, it is not obvious to me that your requirements are in any way reasonable, or even serious ("serious" as in "this is the only reasonable way one can work efficiently on Python" -- plenty of people, almost all of them unpaid volunteers, seem to disagree).

I never said "this is the only reasonable way one can work efficiently
on Python". I said that "there is no  reasonable way one can work
efficiently on Python and I am trying to find one". Feel the
difference.

> By the way, the first thing needed to qualify as a maintainer would be to *prove* that you are up to the task. Not to have a bunch of nifty tools. In other words, you can't just come and say "hey, I'd like to be a maintainer" and expect this request to be granted automatically.

Ok. Let me try to express it in English once more:
search: To be a maintainer I need:
replace: To be willing to become a maintainer I need:
History
Date User Action Args
2010-06-17 12:35:20techtoniksetrecipients: + techtonik, orsenthil, pitrou, eric.araujo
2010-06-17 12:35:18techtoniklinkissue9008 messages
2010-06-17 12:35:16techtonikcreate