Cheers - a good suggestion.
I'm going to reintegrate my patches (separately) with the current code,
and then I'll create appropriate enhancements in bugzilla and attach
them there.
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joerg Mayer
Sent: 14 March 2007 15:08
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Query on status of patches
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 09:58:26AM +0100, Sake Blok wrote:
> I have not seen many
> patches being overlooked actually. There were the occasions where a
review
> lasted a little longer, but most patches were commited within a couple
of
> days. Maybe a patch-tracking system is a little overkill. The majority
of
> patches seem to be easy to review and commit.
Something that we have (sort of) promoted in the past was the following:
Submit your patch to the ml. In case the patch isn't committed/nacked
within 3-4 days then open a bug and attach the patch to the bug. This
way the patch won't get lost and we don't have the management overhead
of tracking all the patches in the bugtracking system.
ciao
Joerg
--
Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
This message should be regarded as confidential. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and destroy it immediately.
Statements of intent shall only become binding when confirmed in hard copy by an authorised signatory. The contents of this email may relate to dealings with other companies within the Detica Group plc group of companies.
Detica Limited is registered in England under No: 1337451.
Registered offices: Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7YP, England.
