On Thursday, 9 February 2017 at 16:48:16 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
There's clearly in part a scaling problem here (in terms of how many people are available in general, and in terms of how many people have expertise on particular parts of the library) but it also feels like a few simple things (like making sure every PR author is given a reliable contact or two who they can feel entitled to chase up) could make a big difference.

Regarding the scaling problem - Perhaps the bug system could be used to help engage a wider community of reviewers. Specifically, update the bugzilla ticket early in the PR lifecycle as an alerting mechanism.

This idea comes from my experiences so far. I've found any number of bugs and enhancements in the bug system that directly interact with things I'm implementing. I typically add myself to CC list so I hear about changes. In many of these cases I'd be willing to help with reviewing. However, when a PR associated with the issue is created, the ticket itself is normally not updated until after the review is finished and the PR closed, to late to help out.

Of course, someone like myself, a part-timer to the community at best, should not be a primary reviewer. However, for specific issues, it's often the case that I've studied the area of code involved. If there is a wider set of people in a similar situation perhaps this might help engage a wider set of people.


Reply via email to