A few pmdevils have become frustruated with just waiting around without any consideration/explanation of why their patches were rejected, thinking that their work is for nothing ( is it because most gods aren't that active, or whatever?).
It's a shame to have pmdevils lose interest (btw - I sympathise with the gods, it is a tough job, I know what it's like).
I say we implement patch comments regardless of how this 1/5th god idea turns out (calling all pmdevils: all this needs is a patchcomment nodetype, patchcomment display page, patchcomment edit page, and a patch for patch display page to include the patchcomments for that particular patch, and a addapatch form -- if you need help/ideas, ask away -- actually, you could get away with simply editing patch display page to include a form for creating nodes of type note, with the root_node set to that particular patch id -- which is better?).
BTW, any ideas on when the next, if any, batch of gods is coming out? (it's been so long since it's been mentioned/discussed, I completely forgot if any were scheduled to happen).
| ______crazyinsomniac_____________________________ Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most. perl -e "$q=$_;map({chr unpack qq;H*;,$_}split(q;;,q*H*));print;$q/$q;" |
In reply to Re: Re: pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea)
by crazyinsomniac
in thread pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea)
by crazyinsomniac
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |