[development] Very concerned over Drupal's core development

[Nathaniel Catchpole]

I agree with Earl here. Several of my patches, including quite big
popular patches that people have bought me beers for, have only got in
because I'm a stubborn git - either re-rolling them 50 times due to
patch conflicts or writing reams of arguments to get them committed.
Not to mention nagging people time after time on irc to get reviews
and/or advice.

Plenty of other people give up (either on the individual patch or core
as a whole), and then those patches either sit in the queue for years
or sometimes get revived by another developer, and then they can still
sit in the queue for another year or two.

This doesn't mean that /all/ lingering patches are lingering for the
wrong reasons, but there's a lot of overhead getting patches in other
than just writing the code.

Having said that, none of this overhead exists for reviewing patches -
and it's slow review turnover which leads to a lot of the lingering,
and being someone who reviews a lot of patches is one of the easiest
ways to get your own patches reviewed faster.




On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Earl Miles wrote:
> Dries Buytaert wrote:
>>
>> As core matures, we might see more patches getting stale.  I think the
>> reason is (at least) two-fold:
>>
>>  1) More patches compete for attention, but fewer of these patches are
>> truly important.  In this case, patches getting stale is not
>> necessarily a bad thing because history has proven that important
>> patches will eventually bubble to the top for the right reasons.
>
> If the 'right reasons' are because the developers got frustrated with the
> process and quit pushing their patch, whereas other developers are extremely
> stubborn and managed to push their patch through anyway, then sure. But just
> because some developer is bullheaded enough to wade through the crap doesn't
> mean that's the right reasons.
>