Mousius commented on PR #13916:
URL: https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/13916#issuecomment-1420611019

   Hi @tqchen,
   
   > In order to get unity merged into main, we will need to ensure the end 
state (at the merging proposal) of the unity branch gets to a ready state.
   
   Merging large branches such as `unity` makes it incredibly hard to review in 
detail and the review process is there to help us review incremental changes. 
Incrementally reviewing is a standard agile practice which typically results in 
fewer defects overall ([great post on that 
here](https://smallbusinessprogramming.com/optimal-pull-request-size/)), even 
if it does take marginally longer for each individual change to land. I'm also 
happy to have a discussion about whether we should move changes to a further 
PR, as in our existing [code review 
guidelines](https://github.com/apache/tvm/blob/main/docs/contribute/code_review.rst)
 part of the process is communication and trust. 
   
   > Suggestions of possible additional test cases or possible technical debts 
are very welcomed. 
   
   By merging this outside of the already agreed process in [the code review 
guidelines](https://github.com/apache/tvm/blob/main/docs/contribute/code_review.rst)
 you've already excluded members of the community who contribute primarily 
through code review and primarily during working hours. The evidence is in this 
PR, had I not been active at the weekend this pull request would've been raised 
and merged without test coverage and would therefore have contributed to the 
technical debt in the `unity` branch.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to