[email protected] said: > The libzmq process as defined leaves no provision for code review > whatsoever. > > I realise that code review is time consuming, costly, and often boring. > > If my suggestion is unreasonable due to the fact that the current > maintainers are unpaid volunteers, then the real problem is elsewhere; the > community should get its act together and: > > a) recruit a competent maintainer with domain expertise from within its > ranks > > b) put in place a mechanism to fund such a maintainer
I missed a very important point which has been brought up before - When patches were sent to the mailing list *before* being committed to the libzmq repo, this provided a window of time for voluntary code review and discussion. This works because there is almost no effort required on the part of potential "lurker" reviewers. Email is a "push" system with PUB/SUB topic filtering using the human mind; we're really good at this. One can lurk on the mailing list, skim threads that one has no opinion on or are outside of ones domain expertise. When a relevant thread or *PATCH* comes up, you can trivially comment on it. This is no longer possible with the current process. I would have to actively spend time on a) going to the libzmq github page with pull requests b) somehow figuring out which I have read, have not read, and which are relevant. lots of clicks involved. c) commenting on the pull request itself. Even then, the PUB/SUB model is broken. Only those people who *actively* monitor Github lest they miss some important commit get a chance to review it. So the current process actually *decreases* the amount of voluntary code review that could be provided by the community. -mato _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
