Quick approval

[Kevin DuBois]

Right, if a review is big enough (say... for instance
~kdub/mir/surface-owns-renderer :D), it should at least get a few reviews,
and be up for 24hours so the whole planet can review it. However, if
smaller bug fixes go in with 1 review, thats ok. I think prudence/not
stepping on toes is ok for the size of the team we have at the moment

Cheers,
Kevin


On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:29 AM, Alan Griffiths <alan.griffiths at canonical.com
> wrote:

> On 09/07/13 06:19, Daniel van Vugt wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I noticed some people are regularly only waiting for a single approval
> > on their MPs and then top-approve themselves.
> >
> > I think top-approving your own MPs is OK if there's already two or
> > more reviews from others, and it's been idle for a few days. But
> > merging with only one real review, on proposals which are not time
> > critical, is probably not ideal. I think we should always be waiting
> > for at least a second review, unless it's a time critical issue.
> >
> > Maybe others in mir-team disagree?
> >
> > - Daniel
> >
>
> Daniel, thanks for flagging this - we shouldn't let our standards lapse.
>
> Some MPs are trivial enough for it to be obvious there are no problems -
> for these I don't care about the number of reviews or think we need to
> wait "a few days". At the other extreme some MPs are complex enough that
> a reviewer can only see that that there are no obvious problems - for
> these it may take days and discussion to reach consensus.
>
> I think it comes to trusting people to know the difference.
>
> --
> Mir-devel mailing list
> Mir-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/mir-devel/attachments/20130709/7d01b88e/attachment.html>