[development] Listen

Moshe Weitzman weitzman at tejasa.com
Tue Jul 3 19:16:25 UTC 2007

> We should also change the perception that RTBC means "a core committer 
> needs to look at this".  When a patch is RTBC, it still means that 
> everyone needs to look at it, and that's part of the reason why many 
> patches are still in the RTBC queue.  I'll try to be faster to send back 
> these to the "code needs (better) review" status, if that helps. 
> Ultimately, this is something everyone can help with.  If a patch is in 
> RTBC for too long, it probably means it could use more quality reviews.

Yes, it would help a lot if committers would process this queue quickly. 

I think many of us are now learning that RTBC doesn't mean "a core 
committer needs to look at this". i'm not too comfortable with this 
statement. i think it is a matter of courtesy to the patch author. 
having progressed all the way to RTBC, a patch merits at least a status 
change. the change can be CNR, CNW, WONTFIX, or COMMIT.

It does not help that drupal.org is often slow and thus queue management 
  becomes tedious. the infrastructure is working on it - but we 
sufferred a lot this release cycle.

More information about the development mailing list