Yes, this is how I do normally, but we need the rule to ensure the PR gets progress. e.g. the reviewer needs to give the feedback in one week, one month or one year. The reviewer has the rights to approve the change and also has duties to make progress.
On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 5:14 PM alin.jerpe...@sony.com < alin.jerpe...@sony.com> wrote: > Hi Xiang, > > Simply add some reviewers on the right side and they will be notified that > someone asks them to step up > > Best regards > Alin > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> > Sent: den 9 mars 2023 10:12 > To: dev@nuttx.apache.org > Subject: Re: DISCUSSION - Usage of mailing lists for apache projects > > If some PR waits for a long time without any review, how to make progress? > For example, this PR sent two weaks ago: > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/8610 > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 4:40 PM alin.jerpe...@sony.com < > alin.jerpe...@sony.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I feel that this thread is getting too long without a real outcome > > > > Some observations from my daily interactions with the project: > > - I like doing reviews on github and I think that many people in this > > thread would agree that this flow is good. > > - I like to be able to see all bugs in one place and get statistics > > for the ASF reports > > > > What I don’t feel right > > - even if I spend time daily on reviewing patches there are still > > changes that I miss and it is hard to get the flow on release date > > - some breaking changes are not discussed enough with the community > > since there are some people that do not have time to review code on > gihub. > > > > As a way going forward I propose that we improve in 2 aspects > > - All breaking commits should be discusses on dev so that people get > > enough time to digest the change and even better get involved int the > > flow > > - all breaking changes should be documented on the release confluence > > page before merging so that we don’t miss mentioning them on release > date. > > - there should be at least 1 independent reviewer (not from the same > > company) so that a patch is merged except board changes (ex an > > employee from the same company merges a patch submitted by another > > employee from the same company, for a board provided by the same > > company) > > > > Thanks > > Alin > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alan C. Assis <acas...@gmail.com> > > Sent: den 8 mars 2023 19:15 > > To: dev@nuttx.apache.org > > Cc: Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> > > Subject: Re: DISCUSSION - Usage of mailing lists for apache projects > > > > Hi Lwazi, > > > > It is not sarcarm, I'm talking about facts. > > > > Also I didn't say Sebastien points aren't valid, but is diverting from > > the real issue. > > > > The issue is not if the discussion is happening here or there, the > > Problem is that we don't have enough reviewers. > > > > So, first step is that NuttX needs to increase the user base, but have > > few users really engaged with the project, reviewing patches every > single day. > > Currently today he have few: Petro and Xiang are exceptional on this > point. > > They are my inspiration to try do more! > > > > Welcome back go NuttX Lwazi (I'm not been sarcastic, I'm happy to hear > > from you again! You have a great knowledge of BLE can we need! I was > > expecting you to share that working example of BLE application using > > our BLE stack). > > > > BR, > > > > Alan > > > > On 3/8/23, Lwazi Dube <lwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 at 09:55, Alan C. Assis <acas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> Sebastien, > > >> > > >> If all the discussions that happens on github start to happen here, > > >> this mailing list will be just like the nuttx-commits mailing list. > > > > > > I'll take this as sarcasm. Sebastien is making a lot of valid > > > points, in good faith, and being dismissive does not help the > community. > > > > > >
