On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 08:52:05PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> That's a very good point (and a good illustration, too). How do you
> like the new second and third sentences below?
> * When reviewing other peoples' code, be tactful and constructive.
> Remember that submitting patches for public critique can be very
> intimidating and when mistakes are found it can be embarrassing. Do
> what you can to make it a positive and pleasant experience for the
> submitter. Set high expectations, but do what you can to help the
> submitter achieve them. Don't demand changes based only on your
> personal preferences. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
I'm not sure. I like the intent, but I'm not sure that it's clear
enough that we're talking about the tone of comments rather than the
type of feedback to provide.
How about something like this?
* Having your code reviewed should feel like a collaboration aiming
for the best result for the project, not like a fight to get your
patch accepted. Try to bear this in mind when reviewing other
peoples' code and consider how you would feel reading the same
comments if the review was the other way round. We are only human
and the tone of a review can influence how the following
* If you do feel that a review is aggressive, don't reply
immediately. Contributors are spread around the world in
different timezones and it is often better to wait a few hours for
others to comment before rushing to defend your patch.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html