Hi Colin - sounds like a great plan to me. How about a 3 month review period? I think it should be clear by
then whatever the implications of the policy are.
Cheers,
Antranig.
On 30/11/2011 10:33, Colin Clark wrote:
Hi all,
I haven't heard any further comments about this. So far, contributors seem
interested in but cautious about the idea.
We'll only know for sure if we try it out. I'd like to propose that we test this
"100% review" approach with Infusion for six months, and assess how it well it
has worked in May.
Any complaints/concerns/comments?
Colin
On 2011-11-14, at 2:32 PM, Colin Clark wrote:
I am interested in the idea that, as Justin points out, this new proposal might
serve as a bit of an equalizer. Regardless of being a contributor or a formal
committer, we all go through the same general workflow. Code in a personal
repository, make a pull request for inclusion into the project repository, and
get reviewed by a peer. At the same time, I also see the argument about
resources. Can we scale the review process to a point where it can be done in a
timely manner for each new change to Infusion?
Any reason not to just try it and find out?
_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
