On 4/24/15 5:59 PM, Frank Filz wrote: > 2a. One solution here is use an e-mail review system (like the kernel > process). This could be e-mail exclusively (I would then have to set up > e-mail on my Linux VM in order to be able to merge patches via e-mail). I'm > not fond of this process, but it would be workable. > Of course, this is the original design rationale for git -- email review. That's what it does best. This would be my preference.
> 2. We should make sure each patch that has significant impact in areas the > author may not be able to test is verified by someone who is able to test > that area. > As I've been doing all along. > 3. It would be helpful to be able to identify one or two critical reviewers > for each patch, and then make sure those people are able to review the > patch. For those patches that may need more than a couple people to review, > we need to stage them at least a week ahead of when we expect them to be > merged, and then somehow flag those patches as high priority for all > required reviewers to actually review. > Yes, this should be for all patches. Submit at least by Monday for Thursday review and Friday merge. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight. http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y _______________________________________________ Nfs-ganesha-devel mailing list Nfs-ganesha-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs-ganesha-devel
