[SCM] Samba Shared Repository - branch master updated
kai at samba.org
Thu Sep 12 10:27:37 CEST 2013
On 2013-09-12 10:06, Michael Adam wrote:
> Since commit 9e7bce53707732700928eaf2bb53a5f1cc5d7784
> which was on 2012-10-19, and was the first commit to
> be pushed under the new proposed reviewed-by/signed-off-by
> rules, we have:
> - a total of 2772 commits
> - Signed-off-by: 1995 tags by 24 different team members
> - Reviewed-by: 2771 tags by 25 different team members
> So your impression that nobody cares does not seem to be justified.
Right, and apparently it works on a voluntary basis. So why do we need a
technical solution for something that's not even broken?
> Of course this slows things down. Doing thorough reviews
> takes time. But the resulting patches are almost always
> much better and don't need to be amended afterwards as much
> as before. So that's worth the pain, imho.
Do we have a metric for that?
> Do you have any patches out there pending review? (as most of
> us do, btw) Then just ping again. Doesn't that work?
> Of course, reviews are not designed for the impatient. ;-)
Do you have any example of people purposely pushing code that wasn't
reviewed after we started doing reviews?
Again, while I currently don't have a problem, my original worry
remains: Having a mandatory review policy will divide the developer team
into the people working on popular areas and the people working on areas
nobody really cares about. The voluntary review model we currently have
If we really need a technical solution and mandatory reviews, we also
need mandatory response times. I don't think we can give these, so the
alternative would be the "Reviewed-by: Nobody Cared <nope at samba.org>" tag.
TLDR; The current voluntary system works. Don't fix it if it ain't broken.
Worldforge developer http://www.worldforge.org/
Wine developer http://wiki.winehq.org/KaiBlin
Samba team member http://www.samba.org/samba/team/
More information about the samba-technical