1 |
On 04/17/2015 01:00 PM, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:33:06 +0200 Alexander Berntsen wrote: |
3 |
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
4 |
>> Hash: SHA256 |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> On 15/04/15 15:02, Peter Stuge wrote: |
7 |
>>> the threshold to become a developer with write access to the |
8 |
>>> gentoo repo is very high |
9 |
>> LOL. No. It's way too low, given our review-less workflow in which any |
10 |
>> dev can do essentially whatever they want. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> The only net results from strict review workflow (when each commit |
13 |
> of each dev must be reviewed and approved by at least N devs) are |
14 |
> tons of bikeshedding, real quality improvement is marginal, because |
15 |
> people are working in different areas anyway. And if you will |
16 |
> consider, that strict review will require N more times effort and |
17 |
> spent time, actual quality of the tree will drop almost N times, |
18 |
> because number of man hours spent on Gentoo is approximately |
19 |
> constant with the same number of devs. |
20 |
|
21 |
If you have followed the recent discussions about gentoos organizational |
22 |
structure, review workflow and overlay situation you would know that |
23 |
there is a pretty simple solution for this problem. |
24 |
|
25 |
Review workflow will not be random/global. Some gentoo projects already |
26 |
have strict review workflow. You just have to map this properly to the |
27 |
tree. If you do that improperly, then ofc it will be crap. |