Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Query on status of patches

[Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Joerg Mayer wrote:
> 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. 

It would also be good to put [PATCH] or some such in the Synopsis of the 
bug.  Otherwise when scanning the list of bugs it's not obvious that not 
only are you requesting feature X but you've already implemented it.

[Of course if you click the box that says your attachment is a patch 
then we can search for patches based on that field but that doesn't work 
if you've compressed or otherwise made your patch not look like a patch 
to bugzilla.]