Hi Larry, +1 from me.
I think this makes sense for the knox_idf branch and should help us keep the momentum going without lowering the bar for what eventually gets merged into main. I also like the idea of tracking the merge with a JIRA, including subtasks for items needing a closer look later. We could even capture code review comments there when we decide they are OK to defer until merge time, giving us a clear list to work through before merging. I'd still expect each PR to get a basic sanity check before merging into the feature branch (beyond the existing unit/integration tests), just to catch anything obvious and keep the branch in good shape. This sounds like a good balance between moving faster and keeping track of what we don't want to lose sight of. Sandor On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 12:10 AM larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Knox-ers - > > I am thinking that we might want to consider switching to a more relaxed > review criteria for the KnoxIDF work. Since we have at least two community > members working on that branch, perhaps we move to something closer to CTR. > > This would allow use to defer some reviews that may be trickier or blocked > by the SME not being immediately available but someone else can review at a > higher level and note what things need resolution prior to feature branch > merge into main. > > Maybe, we create a Jira for tracking the merge of knox_idf and add subtasks > for things that need deeper review at merge time. Then we burn down > whatever tasks are tracked there before the merge. > > Thoughts? > > --larry >
