Hi, I am -1 on this. Let me explain. Am 19.10.2010 03:53, schrieb Robert Collins: > Process Description > Developers which are contributing at or near fulltime to Launchpad > can, after 3 months, choose to land branches without review.
I would agree to this if we had been noticing that most branches by this kind of developers pass reviewer's eyes without any comments. I don't know if we could get solid numbers for this but my feeling is that at most 50% of the reviews I am doing pass without me commenting. That may be owed to the way I review but I'd say it is about the same the other way round (with branches I submit for review). I have had some of my branches greatly improved by a review and I would not want to miss that extra pair of eye balls. > > Rationale > Not all changes benefit from code review / are high enough risk to > need formal review. For instance (not exhaustive): These are all things that we have the "rubber stamp" for. I think it is ok that at least one other developer knows what you are doing and why you are doing it. > > mechanical things (like moving code) > updating source deps Actually, do we have a process for approving source deps? I mean, we look quite closely at our code but what about the code in the dependencies that we use? > rollbacks > typo fixes > improvements to documentation > What do you think? I don't see reviews as a problem but as a help. I agree with what Jeroen quoted that we may want faster reviews (and I am guilty here) but not fewer. Henning _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
