RM responsibility

Aaron Bentley aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca
Wed Jul 4 18:01:46 BST 2007

Hash: SHA1

Kent Gibson wrote:
> Aaron Bentley wrote:
> But my thinking is it would level the playing field for cores and
> non-cores.

I would like that too.

> All in all it feels much harder for someone outside the core to get a
> patch approved.
> And that is a really bad thing cos it undermines community involvement.

I would like to fix that by making it easier for those outside the core
rather than making it harder for those within.  One option would be for
the first reviewer to find a second.

> Btw, the same motivation is behind my original suggestion that the RM
> push the review process along, effectively playing proxy for the
> non-cores.  I prefer that solution to this one since it's lower overhead.

Yes, that's a better direction, I think.

> I agree totally on the style issues.
> But if it is just a matter of getting the idea okayed,

It is still code review.  It can be smaller ideas, like what kind of
interface do we want to use for this?

> then it sounds
> like a good reason for a review (of the idea) by more than just one
> other core, and before coding even starts.  I guess that is starting
> to head down the blueprint path, though more lightweight.

For big ideas, we usually do RFCs or specs.  For smaller ones, it
doesn't seem worth getting approval in advance.  And often seeing the
code makes issues concrete that would otherwise be nebulous.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the bazaar mailing list