On 10-04-16 15:01 , Fred Moyer wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Philip M. Gollucci > <pgollu...@p6m7g8.com> wrote: >> Thats Commit Then Review. Its a VC we can always revert things. > > True, but I think that reverting things rarely (if ever) happens. > >> The RTC (Review Then Committ) suggestion is only for new committers while >> they get acclimated. Unless its some massive architectural change which will >> probably be prose explanation anyway. > > I think this is still worthwhile even for veteran committers (note > that I'm not one of those!). Once code is committed, I think there is > less motivation to review it, but that's just my opinion.
Yes, but there is nothing wrong with asking for a few set of eyeballs to have a look at code before checking it in. I am very comfortable complaining or reverting what I think is bad code getting checked in. OTOH, if you want to post patches and ask for review *before* you commit, I don't mind at all. I think it's a matter of coder's confidence in the code in question. But yeah, it's good to clarify that if you got a commit bit, you don't *need* to wait for +1s, review, or anything else before landing changes. -- Philippe M. Chiasson GPG: F9BFE0C2480E7680 1AE53631CB32A107 88C3A5A5 http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
