Hi everyone, I’d like to initiate a discussion regarding a workflow we used last week to unblock an urgent PR when standard code reviewers were unavailable. We want to gather community feedback on whether this should be an accepted practice and, if so, how to formalize it.
*Context & Challenge* Last week, we had a time-sensitive PR that was blocked due to two factors: 1. *Domain Expertise:* The PR touched Kubernetes and specific infrastructure code that available team members did not feel confident reviewing line-by-line. 2. *Availability:* The subject matter experts familiar with this area were unavailable. *Action Taken* To avoid delaying development, we held an ad-hoc sync with two committers and one IPMC member. Instead of performing a standard line-by-line code review, we reviewed and validated the high-level design. Once consensus on the design was reached, we approved and merged the PR. *Discussion Points / Questions* 1. *Policy Approval:* Should we formalize design-level consensus as an acceptable alternative for urgent PRs? If not, what process should we use to unblock development when domain reviewers are unavailable? 2. *Quorum & Governance Requirements:* If this protocol is acceptable, what minimum criteria should we establish? (For reference, this instance involved a PPMC-authored PR with design approval from two committers and one IPMC member. Would a lower threshold, such as one committer approval, be sufficient?) Please share your thoughts so we can determine the best path forward. Best regards, Ali
