Process for integrating outside patches into ilisp

I've been on vacation the past few weeks and have been slowly catching
up on my backlog of emails. One thing that I've noticed is that, over
the past month, Alain Picard, Thomas Burdick (in ilisp-help), and Adam
Warner have submitted patches to ilisp; however, they don't appear to
have received any response from the ilisp developer list nor have their
patches been incorporated into cvs. Since I'm a relatively new
participant to open source projects, could someone tell me what the
"standard" process is for incorporating patches from programmers who
aren't registered as project developers? One of the advantages
(potentially) of open source efforts is that many eyes are looking at
the source code and patches can come from individuals who aren't
directly associated with the project - that advantage is negated if
there is no process for incorporating patches from others.

If there is no "standard" process in place for ilisp, I would like to
propose the following:

1. Let's nominate a "gatekeeper" who will be responsible for routing
patches to registered developers and providing an initial response to
the patch submitter (official response should be on ilisp-devel so
people know something is happening with the patch but routing & initial
comments could be done by email to avoid cluttering ilisp-devel).
2. Volunteers will be responsible for specific "types" of reviews (e.g.
-- I work with ilisp/clisp on Windows - I would be willing to review
generic ilisp functionality patches, clisp-specific patches or
windows-specific patches; however, I could not verify cmucl or linux
patches)
3. Some degree of patch testing will be done by the reviewer (we all
have day jobs so this may not be very comprehensive; however, at least
some testing should be done) and the patch (if approved) will be
submitted to cvs. If the patch is inadequate or addresses something that
the reviewer thinks is out-of-scope for inclusion, the patch will be
rejected.
4. Notice of the acceptance/rejection of the patch will be posted on
ilisp-devel

How does this sound? If there is some alternative procedure, I am quite
happy to use that; however, I would hate to have patches fall through
the cracks just because we have no procedure in place at all.

I would be willing to act as "gatekeeper" and would volunteer to review
some generic ilisp patches as well as any clisp-specific patches or
windows-specific patches. Who could review cmucl, LW, acl and linux
specific patches?

--
Bill Clementson


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU
Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner.
Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission!
INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php