From: Bastien <email@example.com>
To: Jack Kamm <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Christian Vanderwall <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ob-python.el: Fix issue with sessions on remote machines
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 10:15:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (Jack Kamm's message of "Fri, 04 Sep 2020 18:08:08 -0700")
Jack Kamm <email@example.com> writes:
>> Would you be okay to add yourself as the ob-python.el maintainer?
> Sure, I've added myself as maintainer to the header of ob-python.el.
>> I suggest we have a policy that "Org maintainer(s)" have the last
>> words on everything in Org's core, but that individual maintainers,
>> when known from the header section of an Elisp file, have the very
>> "first look" on bug reports and feature suggestions.
> I'm trying to review ob-python related patches and mail as I notice
> them, and monitor the list for mails with "python" in the subject,
> though some may fall through the cracks occasionally, especially when my
> workload is heavy.
> Should I merge in patches to ob-python.el, as I did here? Or should I
> simply review them, and let the core maintainers merge them in after
Sorry, my policy proposal was incomplete:
- A local maintainer is expected to reply to requests and bug reports
regarding the local functionalities he oversees.
- A local maintainer can commit changes directly to the file(s) he
maintains (either submitted changes or his own).
- Core maintainers have the final word on any change in any file (so
in case of a disagreement with a local maintainer, core maintainers
In general, I would like to encourage "optimistic merging" from more
Does that sound right? When in doubt, always discuss changes first.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-05 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-17 18:47 [PATCH] ob-python.el: Fix issue with sessions on remote machines Christian Vanderwall
2020-08-18 14:21 ` Jack Kamm
2020-08-21 1:37 ` Jack Kamm
2020-09-04 9:55 ` Bastien
2020-09-05 1:08 ` Jack Kamm
2020-09-05 8:15 ` Bastien [this message]
2020-09-05 14:39 ` Jack Kamm
2020-09-05 14:48 ` Bastien
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).