On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Brett Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > 1. When a patch author requests more than one reviewer, they should > make clear in the review request email what they expect the > responsibility of each reviewer to be. [...] > 5. If you're on "FYI" person on a review and you didn't actually > review in detail (or at all), but don't have a problem with the patch, > note this. You could say something like "rubber stamp" or "ACK" > instead of "LGTM." This way the real reviewers know not to trust that > you did their work for them, but the author of the patch knows they > don't have to wait for further feedback from you.
These are excellent suggestions. > Hopefully we can still keep everybody in the loop but have clear > ownership and detailed reviews. It might even speed up some patches > since I can quickly ACK patches I don't care about, and the patch > author knows they don't have to wait for feedback from me. Or do you > think this has too much overhead? > > Comments? I like it. Explicit flow control is almost always better than waiting for a timeout to expire :-). --Amanda --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
