-doc/bugs issue/question

[Gary W. Swearingen]

> Sounds like a good idea to me.  The more help we can give people to make
> better PR's, the better.

The added up-front-ness about it would make for fewer grumpy helpers
too.  Speaking for myself when I was running STABLE, I didn't think
much about CURRENT; I thought that was for bleeding-edge types and
developers, and I chose not to mess with it.  The new warning will
loose many submittals from people like that, but it's the right thing
to do (and will get some to base their PRs on CURRENT).  Again
speaking for myself, having many hours of work ignored can have an
even more serious impact on submittal rate.  In my worst case, I later
got the impression that my days of work were ignored because it would
have been difficult to merge into CURRENT and STABLE didn't make the
priority cut.

So I suggest that the warning be made even more "honest" by stating
that the probability of having the PR used is considerably increased
by basing the PR on CURRENT instead of STABLE.  In the same manner
that it currently states honestly that the probability is increased by
the presence of a patch.


P.S. I've just quit my legacy Linux user group duties, and I'm
planning to return to FDP work in a month or so, but only if I can get
on a fast track to committership, where less of my work will be
ignored for lack of interest or priority.  Starting from submitting
e-mail comments, then patchless PRs, then patches to STABLE, then
patches to CURRENT, one tends to learn the hard way, the inefficiency
and often-times futility, of not being a committer.  Or at least of
not limiting one's self to a few PRs and "seeing them through",
instead of sumbitting many PRs and just hoping they'll get dealt with.