[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Patch reviews

From: Peter Rosin
Subject: Re: Patch reviews
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 09:25:33 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10

Den 2011-06-05 14:56 skrev Stefano Lattarini:
> On Sunday 05 June 2011, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> Den 2011-06-04 11:24 skrev Stefano Lattarini:
>>> Yes, and you're absolutely right complaining about the LIB= -> LIB=''
>>> useless change, and the cat -> unindent "unreported" change; for them
>>> I can only apologize, and fix the ChangeLog entry to report the latter.
>> Did you look for more stuff that may have wiggled its way in? What is
>> the answer to the million dollar question?
>> You need to read through your own patches more carefully. Slow down.
>> What's the rush?
>> Especially when there is virtually no review process.
>> You are also not inviting review when you mostly push FYI patches
>> where the review is an afterthought at best.
> I was doing so just because Ralf had made clear that, due to personal
> reasons, he's unfortunately not avaiable for patch reviews in this
> period; and he was basically the only one doing reviews here.
> But if you say that you might be interested in chiming in more often,
> that's great for me; I will happily restore the 48 or 72 hours grace
> time before pushing a patch (outside master and maint, that is; these
> two branches should only take bug fixes until Ralf is available again).

I'm not saying I will chime in more often, but seeing that the change has
already been pushed makes at least me say "oh well", even if an
improvement could be suggested.

>> Where will the testsuite-work branch go anyway?
> Ideally in master (eventually, once it has been more thoroughly tested
> and rewied, and has become more clean and stable).
>> If you intend to merge it, it would perhaps make sense to try to keep
>> it reasonably clean and leave at least some room for review?
> Yes.  See my proposal above.

The "problem" with Ralf doing reviews is that he's so damn good at it,
so any time I spend reviewing seems like wasted effort, and Ralf then
also gets to review my review adding even more to his plate. I do
realize that this is probably not how you and Ralf see it, but that is
how it is from my pov. Also, there is no way I can dig into all changes
you are proposing.

Now that Ralf is doing something else<tm> for a while, I'm more inclined
to steal a few minutes here and there to suggest something. That may be
true for others as well, so I think it's bad to assume that Ralf is the
only possible reviewer.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]