On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 03:29:01PM +0300, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > > > 21.11.2016, 15:26, "Giuseppe D'Angelo" <dange...@gmail.com>: > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen > > <oswald.buddenha...@qt.io> wrote: > >>> Any idea to how to actually make this work? > >> how about taking the existing processes seriously and exercising social > >> pressure on those who think they are above them? > > > > May I just say that prefer a tool that mandates a workflow over using > > political and social pressures, which in the long term hurt the > > project? > > Well, tools cannot help with social issues, and ignoring review comments is > more like the latter.
Well, right, and wrong, kind of ;-) I think tools can help to *prevent* social issues. As example, I think it easier for people to accept a -1 from the Sanity Bot than to accept exactly the same comment from a human reviewer, specifically when it comes to arbitrary choices like prefering American over British spelling in comments. With the bot I usually just swallow and "fix" the issue, no matter how insane it appears to me. Sounds irrational? It is. It is human. Andre' _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development