On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, Allen Briggs wrote:

: This is a laudable goal, but mind how aggressively you pursue this.  I'd
: rather have the bugs there than have incorrect fixes go in just to make
: 1.3.  :-)

Well, I can certainly agree with this.  With some of the feedback I'm
already getting, this first idea is taking a slightly different shape.

Here's the idea as it now stands:

First, a post of summaries in particular categories, with any cross
references that can be gleaned easily.  Anyone who volunteers to work on a
PR can be assigned work for it, and the PR would be put in an "analyzed" 
state with attached comment of who has volunteered to do work on that PR. 

For PRs with patches already supplied, the patches will be available with
quick URL links in posts to current-users, to use and test before committal. 
Once there is a general consensus that the patch works and there's no
significant debate about possible problems with the code, it will be
committed.  If there is debate that gets too involved, the PR will be put
into a "suspended" state to wait until the debate has worked itself out (if
it works out).

: > It's then up to core to incorporate any fixes before the 1.3 branch.
: 
: I think it should be up to a couple of developers, not to core--there's
: enough on those shoulders.  ;-)

That's true; the commits would therefore be by a developer outside of core
so core can keep their eyes on getting the release packaged. 

More comments?  (It's good to see that the ball CAN get rolling quick here
with a little push.  ;)

=====
== Todd Vierling (Personal tv@pobox.com; Business tv@lucent.com)
== I know you like the Internet, Bobby.  Now go eat your Frosted Flakes.