I think sending one reminder is reasonable. I looked for a feature to do this 
on reviewboard automatically and it doesn't exist, no is one going to be 
implemented.. You can add a new review and just put ping in the comments which 
means everyone will get another email. 


Ali




On Sep 5, 2011, at 2:08 PM, Steve Reinhardt wrote:

> In general I agree that people can't wait forever on getting approval for
> their patches.  A week seems pretty short to me though, given that people
> might be on vacation or traveling for a week and unable to respond quickly.
> I also like the idea of giving people a second notification, simply because
> I know there are cases where you've sent out a reminder and it's prodded me
> to review some patches of yours that I had forgotten about because they
> originally showed up at a time where I was occupied with something else.
> 
> So how about this as a counter-proposal: if you post a patch for review that
> you really want to get pushed, then if a week (or more) goes by with no
> activity you can send out a reminder/warning saying that if another week
> goes by and nobody comments then you're going to commit it.  If a full week
> goes by after the reminder with no activity, then you can commit.
> 
> How's that?
> 
> Steve
> 
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Gabe Black <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hey, everybody. I was just thinking about the conflict between making
>> sure people know what's going on through reviews and have a chance to
>> comment, and also making sure that people don't get bogged down waiting
>> for reviews that no one has an opinion on, or no one else has the
>> expertise to review.
>> 
>> Just to throw something out there, what if we say that any review that
>> hasn't been touched for a week is ok to check in as is? If somebody
>> cares and wants you to wait, they need to at least announce their
>> intention (and thus put themselves on the hook) during that week. That's
>> a long enough time where nobody should feel like they don't have a
>> chance to say something, but also short enough where patches don't float
>> in limbo for very long.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> Gabe
>> _______________________________________________
>> gem5-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> 

_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to