----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ryan Harper" <ry...@us.ibm.com>
> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alo...@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Ryan Harper" <ry...@us.ibm.com>, "Doron Fediuck" <dfedi...@redhat.com>,
> "Mark Wu" <wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
> "Greg Padgett" <gpadg...@redhat.com>, email@example.com,
> "Ayal Baron" <aba...@redhat.com>, "Dan
> Kenigsberg" <dan...@redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 5:06:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Change in vdsm[master]: Use 'yum clean expire-cache' instead of
> 'yum clean all'
> * Alon Bar-Lev <alo...@redhat.com> [2012-10-02 09:43]:
> > > From: "Ryan Harper" <ry...@us.ibm.com>
> > > To: "Dan Kenigsberg" <dan...@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alo...@redhat.com>, "Doron Fediuck"
> > > <dfedi...@redhat.com>, "Mark Wu" <wu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
> > > "Greg Padgett" <gpadg...@redhat.com>,
> > > firstname.lastname@example.org, "Ryan Harper"
> > > <ry...@us.ibm.com>, "Ayal
> > > Baron" <aba...@redhat.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 4:32:30 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Change in vdsm[master]: Use 'yum clean expire-cache'
> > > instead of 'yum clean all'
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Dan,
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't understand why you don't treat "0" at the above...
> > > > >
> > > > > If there were no worries, +1 had been provided...
> > > >
> > > > To me, "0" means "I do not have a strong opinion, I trust other
> > > > people
> > > > to make the right decision, given the facts and worries that I
> > > > have
> > > > raised".
> > > >
> > > > Sometimes I do not give a +1 simply because I did not have time
> > > > to
> > > > review
> > > > the whole code, not because I have a strong worry. "0" means
> > > > "not
> > > > reviewed yet" or "not endorsed yet by me but not rejected by
> > > > me".
> > > >
> > > > A polite and well-detailed -1 should be used daily and not
> > > > considered
> > > > "rude".
> > >
> > > Agreed. It took a little getting used to for myself (mostly
> > > because
> > > of
> > > the 'I would prefer you didn't submit this'), but I think a -1
> > > with comments is much more valuable than a 0 with comments. If I
> > > leave a
> > > 0 with comments, I feel that I'm telling the maintainer that I
> > > don't
> > > feel strongly enough to force the submitter to change the code.
> > >
> > > Using -1 or +1 is similar to Ack and Nack, which give an
> > > affirmative
> > > yes or
> > > no. Should this patch be merged in its current form? That's a
> > > binary
> > > question, hence the need for a +1 or -1.
> > I disagree in that regard.
> > There is a huge difference between discussion and rejection.
> > Having the scale of -1, 0, +1 and not using 0 for discussion
> > actually narrow the scale by 30% to -1, +1.
> > ACK - is a complete ACK to be merge "If I was the maintainer I
> > would have submitted".
> > NAK - is a complete NACK "If I was the maintainer I would have
> > rejected".
> > ACK/NAK are methods of decisions for the entire patch, not for
> > iterative discussion, nor for bookmark what I've reviewed.
> > Maybe in future the scale will be larger... -3...+3, so
> > unprivileged user get -2..+2, then minor comments can be at -1..+1
> > range, but we are not there.
> > I don't like we narrow the scale in vdsm in 30%...
> I don't care that much for a scale; the numbers are arbitrary IMO.
> I just need a way to ensure that the maintainer (and the submitter)
> understand that that IMO, the current patch isn't ready for
> And that the objection to submission in the current state isn't lost.
> If I provide review comments, but don't include a -1, it wasn't clear
> me that the maintainer would view this comment as a real concern. A
> plus constructive review comment IMO makes this point clearly to the
> Dan has clarified his view on the scale; and as long as I understand
> it's being used; that's good enough for me.
It is just harder to work this way, this applies Dan as well who abuses the -1,
and applies only to vdsm among all the ovirt repositories.
I will repeat last time as I still unsure that the argument was clear enough,
no need to discuss this any farther.
You, as contributer that do not have -2, +2, have no mean to differentiate your
view between "I don't like this patch to be included, no matter what minor
issues are resolved", and "I find this patch to be useful and I work toward
making it perfect", when it is perfect I clearly state so using my +1 vote.
I find the differentiation between these cases extremely important. In time I
guess we learn the best approach, as we use one at vdsm and the other at all
other projects. Of course I think the other is more productive.
vdsm-devel mailing list