Reply to Tina and busy maintainers: is there anything we can do?

diff --git a/doc/todo/merge_tina-osm_branch.mdwn b/doc/todo/merge_tina-osm_branch.mdwn
index c20fd18ece45c66edcbdca1b048c0344ffea686f..3251394077743e1a20e80959c79cfc0148227cee 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/todo/merge_tina-osm_branch.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/merge_tina-osm_branch.mdwn
@@ -15,3 +15,24 @@ It has been over 2 years since I created this patch... I have even changed my na
 Any chances of it being merged into master? At this point I am considering if it makes sense to keep using ikiwiki if I have to keep maintaining local patches for years.
 
 --[[Tina]]
 Any chances of it being merged into master? At this point I am considering if it makes sense to keep using ikiwiki if I have to keep maintaining local patches for years.
 
 --[[Tina]]

+
+>> Hi, I can understand your frustration with having outstanding patches for
+>> review/merge. You aren't alone. It's clear that the IkiWiki maintainers are
+>> overloaded at the moment. IkiWiki maintainers, is there anything that we can
+>> do to help?
+>> 
+>> In my case I started [collecting together stuff that I was requesting be merged](https://github.com/jmtd/ikiwiki/compare/3.20200202.3...jmtd:opinionated?expand=1)
+>> into IkiWiki, by myself and others, in a branch that I use for the *Opinionated
+>> Ikiwiki* [[container|containers]].
+>> 
+>> The *Opinionated IkiWiki* container was not intended to be a "clearing house"
+>> for patches, as such, but it could potentially be a way for pending stuff to
+>> get some exposure, which might increase the overburdened maintainers confidence
+>> in the patches. (Would it)? Supposing that anyone is using the container of
+>> course.
+>> 
+>> I've personally not used the OSM plugin at all, but I took a quick look after
+>> you posted the above message. It looks cool! I would probably accept a PR
+>> against the "opinionated" branch in my fork, above, if that was of any interest.
+>> 
+>> -- *[[Jon]], 2021-08-18*