From: Evan Silberman Subject: Re: Adding Message-ID to mail(1) To: tech@openbsd.org Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 12:13:44 -0700 Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote: > [a bunch of stuff] From what I have observed there's basically one reliable way to get one's patches into OpenBSD, as someone making occasional contributions to scratch an itch, without any previously-earned trust from the development team: 1. Send a patch (inline!) that makes a single atomic improvement to something, with some explanation in the email body for why you think it's better. 2. Wait for someone to take an interest, pinging if necessary not more than once a week or so. 3. If someone has feedback, revise your patch in response to that feedback, or else explain why you prefer your approach. Repeat all of the above until someone lands your patch or you get tired and do something else. It is true that sometimes it feels frustrating to work this way, especially in cases like yours where you have a bunch of work you've already done and you think all of it is good. But it's really the only way that I've seen most kinds of patches sent to tech@ get reviewed. It's certainly regrettable that these expectations aren't clearly communicated; OpenBSD doesn't have a ton of "onboarding process" or anything of the kind, presumably because it's an old project mostly maintained by a quite small team of people who mostly know each other and prefer to operate by convention and consensus than by establishing a bunch of bureaucracy and community norms. As you were more or less told some weeks ago, sending a bunch of patches that you want to see all at once linked in a zip file is far from preferred. You're now trying to land a single patch, which is an improvement, but you've resent it several times a day, in two different versions, which is not. In the process you have evidently annoyed at least two of the developers with the most interest in email (generally) and thus mail(1) (specifically), plus probably a bunch of people who have started filtering you out without mentioning it, by acting entitled to the time, attention, and deference of people who have more of a stake in the project than you do. If you reduce the heavy volume of pings and try to keep the grievance and entitlement out of your messages, you might get lucky and someone will still have the patience to work with you on the changes you want to see. If you don't get lucky, you have the source and a permissive license and you can enjoy your version of mail(1) in good conscience. Regards, Evan