| 1 |
On Mon, 06 Jul 2015 19:20:14 +0200 hasufell wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 07/05/2015 08:05 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 20:20:23 +0200 Peter Stuge wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> It's important that the review flow is well-understood and efficient. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > This is impossible in our case due to the lack of manpower. |
| 7 |
> > We already have a lot of bugs, patches, stabilization requests |
| 8 |
> > hanging over there for months and even years. Stabilization request |
| 9 |
> > will require at least two developers to participate in each commit. |
| 10 |
> > This will double manpower required at least. Such approach can kill |
| 11 |
> > the whole project. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> People misinterpret "manpower". If we successfully switch to a |
| 15 |
> code-review approach, then we will need _less_ manpower in the sense of |
| 16 |
> actual gentoo developers. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
You're mixing different issues here. Code review process for |
| 19 |
contributors (outside of development team) will indeed save time |
| 20 |
and manpower. But code review for each developer commit will kill |
| 21 |
time and effort undoubtedly, while net quality will have little to |
| 22 |
negligible improvement. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Best regards, |
| 25 |
Andrew Savchenko |
Archives