On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Peter Stuge <pe...@stuge.se> wrote: > Alec Warner wrote: > > Its difficult to make a large change like "all commits require review", > > particularly for long-time contributors who are expecting to move > quickly. > > I think it's a character flaw (maybe hubris due to lack of experience > and/or ignorance?) to lack the humility to say that I would prefer my > commits to be reviewed by peers. >
Oh I'm not making that argument (its a tough one anyway.) I haven't done any research in Gentoo in terms of error rates (how many), who makes errors (newbies? oldbies? everyone?), what the error impact is (minor, major, data loss?), and so on. On my old team at work we had code review, but it did not impact quality very much because (manual) review catches a pretty specific set of conditions some of the time. We had vastly superior quality by adopting linters (to prevent really dumb mistakes that code review also didn't catch consistently) and fast[1] enough automated testing that caught large subsets of other really common errors. Of course, these are all quite low hanging fruit. [1] for some subset of fast; I think tests still took 5 minutes or so. > > It is obviously easier to stick my head in the sand, but then I > should probably keep my crap in an overlay. (I do, and am happy!) > > If I were committing to gentoo I would want help from my peers to > ensure that what I commit is not just done well but also done right. > I think the past has proven that not all Gentoo developers feel this way (I never did; although I have not committed to the tree in some time.) > > > > I'd be curious how many subprojects use review > > I suspect that it's rare. Most developers are in my experience unable > to work with review. > > > > learning purposes. > > Another significant benefit of review, besides the obvious quality benefit. > > > > I'd also be curious what adoption of a code review system would be > > like if it was not required (but was available, and perhaps > > required for specific subprojects that adopt it.) > > I think this is a lovely idea! I'd really like that setup! > > > //Peter > >
