> But if Meem can checkout the file and make the changes in less time > than it takes him to write the review comment - does it make sense for > him (and every other reviewer) to write a seemingly endless set of > change requests?
This actually isn't the role of the code reviewer. I'm my experience, reviewers often bring up points that require further discussion or are negociable. As a developer, I would be frustrated if a reviewer made a change in code that I was working on without first discussing the matter in detail. I would rather make the change myself, instead of having a code reviewer do it for me. > I don't see the reviewer offering up his experience and suggesting > changes or even providing a "pointer" (aka URL) to a suitable > solution. IOW - for someone unfamiliar with the problem domain, it > might take them several hours to figure out the "problem" and devise > the "solution" - while the reviewer could resolve the issue, in a > fraction of that time. Maybe and maybe not. It's also entirely possible that the reviewer can point out something that could easily be fixed by the developer, whereas it would take the reviewer much longer to learn the new code and make the fix. Fundamentally, it's the job of the code reviewer to provide review and feedback. The developer is responsible for fixing the bugs and translating the feedback into something that satisfies the concerns raised in the review process. > Agreed - I'm just asking him to be part of the solution instead of > spending more than the equivalent time pointing out the need for > changes. Code review really is part of the solution. -j _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
