If you do like that then you are doing it wrong. Review process is _not_ based on a name / company / sun activity. It is based on the change content. Even best people do mistakes.
Cheers, Jędrek On piątek, 13 października 2017 15:48:51 CEST Viktor Engelmann wrote: > I am thinking about the scenario when I read a 300 line commit and I am > unsure about some of the lines. Say it removes one include and adds > another include. > > If that commit comes from someone whom I talk to every day - someone > whom I know to be very concerned about security and privacy - and > someone I know is competent and has approver rights - I might ignore > these 2 lines and assume that the compiler will fail on the CI in case > the removed header was still needed. > > When the commit comes from someone whom I have never heard of - I will > look into whether there is a symbol that will now be resolved > differently - and if there is, I assume that this "differently" opens a > backdoor. > > On 13.10.2017 14:52, Marc Mutz wrote: > > On 2017-10-13 13:04, Viktor Engelmann wrote: > >> * I don't think we need to be as paranoid towards contributions > >> from > >> our own employees as we need to be towards external contributions. > > > > I believe you got that the wrong way around :) > > > > Thanks, > > Marc _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
