[Python-Dev] We should be using a tool for code reviews (original) (raw)
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sat Oct 2 08:11:25 CEST 2010
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] We should be using a tool for code reviews
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PPC Leopard build slave going down for an upgrade
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
Usually rubber stamps are reserved for cases where the fix really is trivial, or a change is large but mechanical, or when no reviewer can be found for a time-sensitive fix (very rare). You at least need to record the rubber stamp in the commit message, and be prepared to defend it if it trips up someone's post-commit eyeball filter.
A system like that, which still trusts committers to make the call that rubber stamping is appropriate, sounds significantly more workable to me than one which required review even for trivial changes.
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] We should be using a tool for code reviews
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PPC Leopard build slave going down for an upgrade
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]