On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That last one is actually an area where I *dis*agree with the FreeBSD > guidelines - I see asking for someone to revert a change as a big > deal, as it means we're laying claim to a non-trivial amount of their > time. A non-urgent request for clarification is a different story, but > I also see us occasionally repeating a pattern where long before the > person that actually made a change has a chance to respond to a > thread, there'll be half a dozen or more people jumping in saying > "Yeah, I want an answer too!". I have seen a couple of these too. Sometimes it is a pile on, but other times it is a very reasonable question to python-dev that goes completely unanswered. Those cases (which are admittedly few) are unfortunate b/c if one person has a question about a commit, then others probably to do. When the question goes unanswered, then we miss out on learning something. For example, I remember a case from a few months ago where someone (don't remember who off the top of my head) made a micro-optimization and there were post-commit questions about it. As far as I can tell, the question went unanswered and I sincerely was curious what the rationale for the change was. I felt like there was something we all could have learned from the potential discussion around the question that was asked. > Given the global nature of the lists, I think we should be giving > folks *at least* 24 hours to reply to a question before assuming > they're not going to respond, and given that only some of us get to > count reading and replying to python-dev threads as work time, a few > days leeway would be better (perhaps even a week to account for folks > that are busy with other things during the week and mostly contribute > on weekends). Those of us that *do* get paid for this also need to try > to remember to account for that asymmetry in available time for > participation. To me this depends on why the change is being questioned. If there is a question about why a change was made or a minor bug was found in post-commit review*, then I agree it can wait a few days. On the other hand, if someone commits a change that turns all the build-bots red and doesn't respond for several hours, then I would think that is fair game to revert. So, I do think reverting changes is a very reasonable course of action at times. It should just be used judiciously. -- Meador * Ideally these kinds of things would be caught in pre-commit review, but I understand that it is not always practical to expect that everyone gets a chance for pre-commit review for every change or that every bug is caught in pre-commit review. _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
