Hi, On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Colin Walters <walt...@verbum.org> wrote: > In this scenario, I don't want to lose the critical information that the > patch has been reviewed (and who reviewed it). So here's the proposal: I think when the person who reviewed a patch is critical information, then the details of the review is normally also important.
I don't think the person who reviewed a patch is always critical information, though. Certainly, drive-by pastebin patches should be trivial and obvious. If the proposed changes aren't trivial and obvious, then they should go to bugzilla first so there is a paper trail leading back to the discussion. Basically, adding the reviewer's name doesn't hurt anything, but my opinion is it doesn't necessarily help either. What does help is knowing that the patch was sanity checked at all (like you said), and not committed blindly, and at that point adding the person who did the sanity checking doesn't seem like a bad idea. --Ray _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list