Yo, On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Fernando Perez <fperez....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Darren Dale <dsdal...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Ryan May <rma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Agreed in principle. However, do we as devs want to get/give reviews >>> on every change that fixes typos in the docs or fixes stupid bugs in >>> examples? I think there's a point of diminishing returns. >> >> I agree. Hence the "in general" qualification. > > FWIW, my take on this question from the same conversation on > ipython-dev a few days ago: > > http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/ipython-dev/2011-February/007258.html > > Others seemed OK with that approach.
In nipy, we really haven't got into the swing of code review, but I see sympy going for it with enthusiasm, and they're better than us :) Our policy thus far has been: doc changes : go for it small bug fix with test : use judgment, probably go for it anything else : post and ask for review. In general (TM). No review, after some period, perhaps with reminder, go for it. It may not be very obvious, but the wait-for-review step has far less inconvenient consequences using git than svn because it's so easy to merge, rebase and so on. (lurking now resumed), Matthew ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Free Software Download: Index, Search & Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Matplotlib-devel mailing list Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel
