| 1 |
On Sun, Jul 05, 2015 at 09:05:59AM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 20:20:23 +0200 Peter Stuge wrote: |
| 3 |
> > It's important that the review flow is well-understood and efficient. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> This is impossible in our case due to the lack of manpower. |
| 6 |
> We already have a lot of bugs, patches, stabilization requests |
| 7 |
> hanging over there for months and even years. Stabilization request |
| 8 |
> will require at least two developers to participate in each commit. |
| 9 |
> This will double manpower required at least. Such approach can kill |
| 10 |
> the whole project. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Agreed. Forcing all commits from developers to go through a code review |
| 13 |
from another developer before they hit the tree would potentially |
| 14 |
kill the entire project. I would strongly veto something like this, |
| 15 |
because we flat out don't have the manpower to keep up with it. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Code review is good at a limited scope, e.g. for non-developers |
| 18 |
> where we have review anyway. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Agreed; I could see something like this being beneficial. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
William |
Archives