Speaking of code reviews, I just got a bit confused myself by <https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~mbp/bzr/trivial/+merge/10501>. The branch says "merged" because it's merged into trunk, but the mp says "unmerged" because it wants to go into bzr/2.0 not trunk, and this fact is only visible in the fine print.
2009/8/26 Jonathan Lange <[email protected]>: >> We require two people to provide +1's and no one to provide a -1 >> before a branch can land. Our reviews are comments on the bug >> report for the issue. This mostly works well, but ambiguous >> situations arise, such when a +1 has been given by reviewer1 and >> then reviewer2 finds a major problem. At this point the +1 from >> reviewer1 isn't really valid, they need to go back and re-review. >> We currently manage this by following the discussion. When we don't >> know what the status is we talk to a reviewer directly to figure it >> out. >> >> Merge proposals don't really change this situation. This isn't >> really a blocker as much as it's a non-adopter. > > Good point! Could you please file this as a bug too? The question seems to be: what could Launchpad do better here, without requiring strong AI to interpret the comments. Perhaps just asking the human, after each comment, "now what's the overall state of the discussion?" by putting the status in the comment field not separately? -- Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/> _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
