On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 06:45:28 GMT, Thomas Stuefe <stu...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> The informal rule is that ongoing discussions should be closed and that > nobody strongly objects to a change. Two reviewers are easy to come by. The > point of this rule is that you have a reasonable chance to block changes you > strongly oppose. And that every change in the code base has the buy-in from > the majority. > > Note that a patch is seldom blocked by one person alone for a prolonged > amount of time. But sometimes, overworked reviewers may block-then-ghost > without meaning to. Requires patience from authors and responsibility from > reviewers. As an author, it is okay to ping after a while and, getting no > answer, to integrate with a clear warning. > > This all requires more time than faster paced projects, which is accepted for > most RFEs. Requires more discussion and convincing, but gives us a better > community. Still faster than getting in kernel patches :) Okay, fair. I will keep all this in mind. Thank you! Let's continue the discussion, will respond in a second. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12229
