Hi! Ague Mill wrote (14 Nov 2012 09:42:05 GMT) : > intrigeri: >> Ague Mill: >> > `feature/persistent_bookmarks` confirmed working and merged in >> > `devel`. >> >> I'm very happy 0.15 will have this feature. >> >> Nitpicking: did I miss the call for review?
> That feature was implemented by Alesandro. I took care of the review. > [...] > I took care of the package upload, removed the now integrated patch from > the branch, checked once more that it was working as intended. This is great. > Do you think an extra review is required in that case? (Speaking as myself, not as the WAN.) I'm not sure I would put it that way. But I'm sure the way it went is not entirely satisfying to me. Please let me explain how things went from my PoV. I followed the process that lead to this great new feature from a remote standpoint; I did not want to closely follow every iteration, so I was waiting for it to reach a "good enough" state to give it a try and have a look at the implementation. Reaching this checkpoint state is generally expressed in the form of a review request sent on tails-dev. This did not happen, or I missed it (sorry if that's the case, again), so it feels like the first chance I have to look at something once it is considered good enough for merging is... after it's merged, the day before a freeze. So, from my point of view, the whole process feels like rushing things in in a way that does not leave much room for peer-review. Also, my impression was that, given the amount of guidance you have provided to Alesandro during the implementation process, you almost acted as a co-implementer, so the situation gets blurry. I'm not sure what I think is *required* (I mean: by our agreed upon rules) in such neither-black-nor-white situations. I'm not sure I want stricter or more precise rules that deal with every kind of situation. I'm quite sure I don't want to endlessly list more and more formal requirements. But, I'm sure that *giving a chance* to other Tails developers to look at a new feature *before it's merged*, without them having to follow each development iteration, should be something we take seriously: this is something I feed is needed to happily work together, to make it easier for less-involved people to participate, and to make our stuff better thanks to others' different skills and PoV. Cheers! -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc _______________________________________________ tails-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev
