Code review required for commits - Discuss.

[Jeremy Allison]

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 03:48:53PM -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:
> Jeremy and Simo brought this up in another topic, but it deserves its
> own thread really.
> 
> Personally:
> 
> I have a rate of "bit rot" I expect on Illumos/Solaris.  It's usually
> 1-2 build breaks, and a few minor issues if I walk away for 6 months.
> Yes... I have expectations on just how broken things get.  Sometimes
> we all exceed them.  Sometimes not.  But the rule of thumb: "Master
> won't build 100% right if I haven't touched it in 6 months." is right.
> 
> Also, in most serious work I've done, I've always had reviewers before
> committing my code, provided I'm not the only one working on it.  It
> is just standard procedure.
> 
> So consider this my +1, to their ideas, and giving them a "rule".
> 
> Actual formal suggestion:
> 
> No team member commits their own code.  All code will be "signed off"
> by two team members, as a team member you may sign off your own code.
> The "non-author" team member will be responsible for pushing the code.
>  If there are two they can agree among themselves. ;)
> 
> Release branches work as they do today, though the + should be treated
> as a sign-off in bugzilla.  All bug commits should now contain their
> bug number in them, so we can track back what happened.

Thanks for writing this up so well Ira.

A big +1 from me.

If a majority of Team members vote +1 on this, I'd like
to see it adopted as policy immediately.

Cheers,

Jeremy.