Thanks, Dan. The intent behind contacting specific people to avoid
patch purgatory, but I see your point that the items that are of most
value and which have been put together well will naturally "bubble" to
the top because people will be willing and interested in reviewing them.
A sort of Darwinian approach to patch integration :)
The intent behind assigning an item was not to force someone to look at
something but to allow each person to know what items are on their
plate, either to fix, review, commit, or close. Perhaps that's not an
issue; I was trying to address Kathey's concerns. I do agree assigning
a patch review could discourage others from looking at the patch, but in
most cases you're doing well if you get *one* person to look at your
patch, let alone multiple people...
David
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
David Van Couvering wrote:
I'd like to add that we can improve the process immediately without
having to wait for the JIRA changes, by
(a) contacting a *specific* person to review and to commit a patch and
(b) re-assigning items to the person responsible for the next step in
the lifecycle of the item, so that an individual can easily determine
what they are responsible for.
It's worth looking around to see what other Apache projects do before
deciding on an approach, e.g. see
http://httpd.apache.org/dev/patches.html
Contacting a specific person just seems wrong to me, but it's more of a
gut feeling. Some of the concerns that pop into my mind are
- assigning a reviewer from the same company could hinder integration
of the community, while assigning a task to someone else does not
seem appropriate. Open source is volunteer, and no-one has any right
to assign work to another.
- A specific reviewer seems to go against the many eyes on the code,
it can discourage any one else from looking at the patch.
Just things to think about ...
Dan.
