Mario, I think you have a very valid point, and I think this could be adjusted by 2 committers. Another thing that we could take advantage in the future is, giving the diverse and complex codebase, use codeowners [1] and balance better the code review among all the committers.
[1] - https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/managing-your-repositorys-settings-and-features/customizing-your-repository/about-code-owners Regards, Alex On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 12:32 PM Mario Fusco <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Sorry if I'm reading and replying to this email with so much delay. > > > • The other is from a PPMC member. > > In all honesty this specific constraint seems unnecessarily and > excessively restrictive to me. I'm afraid that waiting for an approval from > a so small group of persons for all the pull requests in all kie projects > could become a serious bottleneck. In this way we may have pending pull > requests waiting for weeks or months. > > The other point of attention is that the whole kie codebase is quite huge > and diverse. There could be no more than one person in the PPMC group with > the right competences to give an informed opinion on a specific pull > request. Or in some cases not even that one. Who will review an operator > written in Go? And even for the core part of Drools (which of course is my > main concern) there could be only Mark to have an idea on how to review a > pull request. And in some specific newer parts like the reliable session or > the Quarkus integration maybe not even him. > > Do you have any opinion on this? > > Thanks for feedback, > Mario > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
