On Aug 24, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
> I'm a little concerned that the current review process is all ex post facto.
> It makes more work for reviewers and the history ends up looking confusing. I
> think we should work out a review process that can happen before things are
> pushed to petsc-dev, so that the authors of the patches can clean them up in
> response to comments. When done right, this ends up being less work for both
> the reviewers and the authors.
Propose a system.
Barry
Just make sure it doesn't involve Sean holding the master password for the
petsc repository and then getting hacked again.
