You missed the second half of my writeup.
From: cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-boun...@eclipse.org] On Behalf Of Mickael Istria Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 8:43 AM To: cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] 6 month release cycle On 07/09/2013 05:24 PM, Konstantin Komissarchik wrote: I don't see why manual Gerrit reviews would be desirable. Since the only goal here is to ensure that aggregation doesn't break, a successful aggregation pass is enough to prove that the contribution is good. A successful aggregation pass is enough to ensure build works once. The Jenkins Gerrit plugin would provide that. A human review would help to ensure that the contribution is good (sustainable URL, stable content, conformance to guidelines). Code review would decrease the amount of failed aggregation builds (because bad URLs would have more difficulties to get in) and would make contributors more aware of what is expected from them. Code review FTW! http://www.benlinders.com/2013/the-economics-of-software-quality/ and http://www.benlinders.com/wp-content/uploads/Business-Benefits-Reviews-Ben-L inders.pdf -- Mickael Istria Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools> My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets <http://twitter.com/mickaelistria>
_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list cross-project-issues-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
