Hi Alex, On 27.10.2025 12:07, Alex Herbert wrote: > Is this more formal than the current commit and *no* review process? > > There are some commits that have made it into the code base that were > not reviewed and should have been. At the moment the review process > for me is when I have time to scan through the commits@ mail for repos > I am familiar with and check if the change makes sense.
I try to do the same, but the volume has grown beyond what is realistically reviewable. At the moment I have a 3-day backlog and over 300 unread messages on `commits@`. I could use Sieve filters to strip out Dependabot noise, but even with filtering the remaining activity would still be too high to follow meaningfully. And that’s just my situation: many committers don't have access to Sieve filters and can not filter based on custom headers such as `X-Git-Refname`. In practice, what ends up happening is: - I review a small sample of commits, - I assume others are reviewing the rest (which is unlikely, since everyone faces the same overload), - And I hope nothing serious slips through. That’s not a healthy or reliable process, and it leaves both contributors and users exposed. Piotr --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
