[gambit-list] Gambit version for medical apps?
Marc Feeley
feeley at iro.umontreal.ca
Sat Jul 16 07:52:48 EDT 2016
I agree with Brad. Let’s not blow this out of proportion. I don’t foresee very deep work on new patches. It is mostly picking patches from those done since that version so there has already been a decent level of scrutiny. Also we could have “lts” and “lts-candidate” branches so the patches can go to lts-candidate first and if the interested parties (to be determined) give their ok then the patch is applied to lts too.
Marc
> On Jul 15, 2016, at 11:39 PM, Bradley Lucier <lucier at math.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
> On 07/13/2016 11:00 PM, Adam wrote:
>> I'm thinking a particular "LTS maintenance protocol" should be devised
>> for the LTS branch, something like that:
>>
>> * After the initial formative phase the next 3-4 months, the
>> introduction of a _rule_ that a _pull request must be quarantained for
>> 90 days_ and be _OK-ed by at least three people, *ON* the emailing list_.
>>
>> And perhaps that the pull request must be taken through some
>> specified build, testing and code analysis tools.
>
> I often get the feeling that there aren't three people on the mailing list qualified to give an opinion on a specific patch, whether they wanted to or not. (I'm certainly not qualified to comment on the majority of Marc's patches.)
>
> Perhaps we should just give the UBC people whatever they want to start, and then work out protocols after we see what might be working.
>
> Brad
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list