On 12/28/13 6:16 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Since we stared with a review process for adding new modules to Phobos
around eight new tools have been added without any review process
similar to the one used for Phobos modules. They were only reviewed in
pull requests.
Some of these are minor tools/scripts but there are larger tools as
well, like RDMD (added before the release process) and DustMire (added
after the release process).
I think that new tools should use the same review process just as new
modules for Phobos do. What do you think?
That would, of course, be great.
I can't stop mentioning again that we are having a severe deflation of
reviewers. We are currently treating our contributors the worst way
possible - with indifference.
The oldest pull request is two years old:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/398. There is
activity on the new pull requests, but many old pull requests are just
left unreviewed. This is especially painful for new or casual
contributors, who make an attempt and are discouraged by the lack of
care. Also, due to there being fewer attentive reviewers than
contributors, some requests are pulled without sufficient review.
That makes me worried about adding another repo to the workload of
reviewers - it means spreading an already insufficient resource even
thinner. Of course the right solution to this is more review participation.
Andrei
