[development] Splitting up patches
nedjo at islandnet.com
Fri Aug 25 17:53:32 UTC 2006
> I don't think we need complex rules here. Nor can people sign off things
> in advance.
I wasn't being clear. I don't mean rules, or formal sign-off. What I'm
trying to capture is what sometimes currently happens in the patch queue,
and is successful. There are (informal) agreements and commitments about
process that allow us to break up a larger patch. A core committer says: the
approach is looking good, it has a good chance of making it in if changes
can be made. The individual or (better) group leading the change says: okay,
we'll work on these changes, maybe in separate issues as suggested, and
we'll do the followup that's needed.
I see a couple of common weak points in this process, though. 1. Broken up
pieces (separate patches) probably need a slightly different set of
criteria, as they are steps toward a goal. We're not always clear about
this. 2. Broken up pieces need a commitment to followup. As individuals or
groups leading a change, we're often weak on followup. The immediate change
gets in and we move on to something new and more exciting than cleanup.
So, to work well, the "break it up into pieces" approach relies on informal
agreements and commitments and trust from both the contributors and the core
committers. The core committers need to go somewhat on faith, and the
contributors need to follow through. Ideally, this is mapped out a bit in
advance, there in the patch queue, so we know the game plan and what we're
all committing to.
More information about the development