John W. Linville wrote: > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 08:42:45AM +0200, Olivier Galibert wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:12:42PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:55:18PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >>>> Not really, patchwork shows status immediately. >>> Immediately when someone does something with it, right? So, the same as >>> my development cycle? >> I guess the main difference is that patchwork allows one contributor >> to see that his patch has just not been checked yet, vs. missed/lost. > > In Greg's defense, I find patchwork to be fairly unwieldy (which is > why I don't use it). It is certainly possible that I am missing some > key feature, but my limited experience with it suggested to me that all > the clicky-clicky stuff required to deal with the individual messages > queued in patchwork nearly doubled my time overhead associated with > merging patches. Just from a patch submitter perspective, I'd like to see some kind of response. I can believe what you say about patchwork, so I wouldn't advocate it. I agree to Joe's perspective that Greg is overbooked regarding time. I think that this is an ongoing problem, not just a current one that will go away, so for me, the question is what is Greg willing to do about it? --- ~Randy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
