Code review required for commits - Discuss.

[simo]

On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 18:18 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 08:56 +0200, Michael Adam wrote:
> > On 2012-10-12 at 08:43 +0200, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 04:07:34PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 06:54:50PM -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I think Matthieu has a point here, and it is important.  Timely review
> > > > > is going to be key.
> > > > > 
> > > > > And I'm going to amend myself:  If there is code that has sat for 3
> > > > > business days, the author/sponsor may push.  A simple flag for review
> > > > > will buy time to do the review on complex code.  Use your brain.  But
> > > > > if there are no flags... that is consent from "samba-technical".
> > > > 
> > > > I'm ok with that. If someone ignores a patch on samba-technical for
> > > > 3 days without even saying "I want to review this" then it's probably
> > > > good to go.
> > > 
> > > Just for my understanding (lots of mails to read...): Does
> > > this mean that if I ask someone for review and I get no
> > > response whatsoever, I am free to push it without review? Or
> > > do I have to get someone else to review it?
> > 
> > My feeling is that 3 days might not be enough.
> > I think we could do the following:
> > 
> > * sending a patch to samba-technical with request for review
> >   is the call for review to everyone.
> > * if there is no reaction, author should ping again after 2-3
> >   days (workdays).
> > * I would give a free push pass not earlier then 1 week after
> >   requesting review
> > 
> > Generally, it should work out in not more than 2-3 days of course.
> 
> As Ira said before, and I tend to agree with him on this much, if nobody
> is interested after 3 business days, then nobody is interested.
> Stretching this process out for a week is only going to cause
> aggravation for no additional benefit. 

Can you explain what is the aggravation ?

I *really* do not get it.

I have kept 80+ patchsets in my tree for *months* in all major works
I've done in the past couple of years and I haven't had a single issue
with it.

So I really don't get why you keep saying this is disruptive ?
*How* exactly is this model disruptive to you ?
*What* exactly prevents you from doing ?

Yes reviews will force you to create better patches and sometimes to
rework them, what is wrong with better code quality ?

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>