Code review required for commits - Discuss.

[Kai Blin]

On 2012-10-12 11:53, Volker Lendecke wrote:

> This comes down to people interested in it. To me this is a
> social process that will have leaks, but all human activity
> has the potential for flaws. I think the mechanism to fix
> things after mistakes have happened don't need to be
> formalized. If your patches for the DNS server are ignored
> forever, the ultimate fix is to create a modular interface
> so that you can do your own thing independently. This is
> really the ultima ratio with many, many steps before that.

That'd really assume I care enough about this to get _those_ patches
through the review ;)

Anyway, I'm happy to give the reviewer-push system a try. If it works
for my areas of interest as well as it does for the "hotter" areas like
the file server, it'd certainly mean more eyes get to see the code.

I see this as a similar step to the autobuild system, which also makes
it harder to get an individual commit in but overall improves quality.
I'm just a bit worried that a review system is going to be more biased
than the autobuild system. Prove me wrong and everybody is happy. :)

Cheers,
Kai

-- 
Kai Blin
Worldforge developer http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developer http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin
Samba team member http://www.samba.org/samba/team/