I've considered contributing to Django in the past but assumed I wasn't "good enough" to do so. Seeing immediately gives me encouragement to try. I think it's good.
I even followed the bug tracker triage docs and tried to find a reviewer only to get scolded for it[2]. Then I had to wait 20 days to get a response on the patch. It was a "wontfix" because documented bugs are actually features.
But now that there's a code of conduct all this has changed and I feel the urge to contribute again to Django /s
[1] https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/18494
[2] https://groups.google.com/d/topic/django-developers/K95mZose...
I don't know the Django process, but this seems pretty standard. Your initial post doesn't add anything new to what the patch already did. They were letting you know that posting your request to the list won't speed up the process.
Unfortunately, with an all volunteer development team, it's hard to put time aside to helping new people with what doesn't seem like critical patches. In my observation, the way to solve this problem is to develop more patches, including ones that are more critical. Critical/useful/neat patches get priority. After you do a few of these, then you can get people interested in your other patches, and/or become part of the core team.
Where you'll then find that your time is spent working on new core features, and not enough time spent helping new people become core developers. ;)
For what it's worth, my oldest open bug reports are 10 years old. One for Twisted, http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/288 , and the other for Python, http://bugs.python.org/issue747320 . I still see occasional activity about each.
That added nothing new, because anyone who would review it has already been informed. That's what the reply told you. They have no idea who you are, or what you know about the process, or even that you want to follow the process.
You then followed up with "How else am I supposed to find someone to review my patch? I got no response on IRC." That does give the sense that you're exasperated. That doesn't help them understand that you want to work with them.
Also, your first email has the wrong tone, in several ways.
You wrote that you "need a reviewer to mark the ticket as RFC". That is a presumptive view, because it assumes that a reviewer will mark the ticket as RFC. The reviewer might say that it needs many changes, and pass it back to you for continued development.
Second, the line "Please take a look if you're familiar with this area of Django." is not helpful to the person reading the email. How does someone know if they are familiar with that area without actually going to the bug? They have to take a look. Which means that anyone who might review it will have to take a look, no matter if they are familiar with it or not.
My belief is that if you had asked a question about the process, rather than the patch, and explained how you were trying to work within the existing process, then you would have gotten a more useful answer. For example:
"I've just contributed my first patch to Trac. Now I'm waiting for a reviewer. I asked for one on IRC but got no answer after several hours. The contribute FAQ suggests asking here as well. Can someone here review <url> for me?"
That's gentler than the email you first sent. It would have probably gotten an answer like what the FAQ says:
Remember, "it’s not personal. Django is entirely developed by volunteers (even the core devs), and sometimes folks just don’t have time."
Instead of developing a patch, what about reviewing the patches that others have submitted? Do this enough times and someone will likely reciprocate.
As you might have guessed, that was my first and last try to contribute to this particular open source project. I won't do it again. Maybe this attitude is unusual in the subset of Django users who at some point want to contribute something back to the community. Or maybe the core developers have the wrong approach to encouraging new members of the community and instead of making sure the process works they spend the time writing codes of conduct.
As I wrote, what you saw here is typical of most volunteer-based project. There's not enough people working on a project to cover all of the details, and those people tend to do the things that interest them. Reviewing others' patches is low on the list, unless it's something which involves them directly.
It's likely that you'll get similar responses in other projects. As I wrote, there are ways around it. Mostly be putting a lot more effort into helping the project before you demand things from people. Again, I point out that a couple of my bug reports are 10 years old, and still getting infrequent attention.
Another way to say this is that if you're the person who wants so much attention or quick feedback, then you're not the type of person who would do well in a volunteer-driven, distributed project. But there are other volunteers who are a better fit, and the Django team doesn't know how to specify which type they are looking for.
In any case, the response email wasn't scolding.