|
|
## List of large patches over last couple of years
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Big big patches
|
|
|
- V3 onion patch series
|
|
|
- Rust build system changes
|
|
|
- Rust protover
|
|
|
- Protover voting changes
|
|
|
- KIST and the schedulers
|
|
|
- Shared Random
|
|
|
- Guard overhaul (prop 271)
|
|
|
- Consensus diff stuff
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Not merged
|
|
|
- Bridge guards (prop 188)
|
|
|
- KIST v1
|
|
|
- All the datagram tor papers
|
|
|
- Cell nageling 7743?
|
|
|
- All those research papers
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Pervasive but not big:
|
|
|
- crypto.h refactor
|
|
|
- free macros
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Insights
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Start small
|
|
|
- We should offer to do the changes needed.
|
|
|
- Offer feedback like "for next time..."
|
|
|
- Can we tag org members on trac? (So people know whether they are getting feedback from somebody who seriously knows what's up)
|
|
|
- We need to get our message across in a positive way, and say "hey, you need to get to know us".
|
|
|
- Maybe we should say more about what to expect when you talk to us and send in a patch.
|
|
|
- Try to be more welcoming and less intimidating to potential contributors -- we have high standards, but we could be kinder about helping people meet them.
|
|
|
- What to expect (both for an individual contribution and for integrating into the team?)
|
|
|
- Learning conventions of how the team works is important -- some of this we don't write down for various reasons. Also it can be intimidating if we write all of it down in one place. Maybe high-level overviews are best. |