-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/21/2010 11:02 PM, Robert Collins wrote: > - I don't believe responsible adults who value code review will > choose to bypass the codereview process unless they really don't think > a review will help the team overall
I think that if reviews are not mandatory, people may encounter pressure to not get something reviewed. > - I don't think the current review system reduces our defect rate > substantially (based on the very real > defects we keep adding to the codebase) The purpose of reviews is not QA, but education. To quote Kiko: "Reviews are a mediocre QA tool but an excellent learning tool" > - allow reviewers to have optional reviews > I proposed 3 months because I think in that time period one will > learn enough to know when one knows and when one doesn't: that's the > key metric that matters. I think that someone who isn't a reviewer but > has been landing regular branches for 3 months is certainly past this > level of knowledge. I'd *like* us to use 3 months, but if it makes the > difference between doing/not doing the experiment, then 'is a full > reviewer' would be tolerable. I think if reviews are optional, we're really trusting people to review themselves, aren't we? Doesn't that only make sense if they're a reviewer? Aaron -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkzBrn0ACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI0blACcDspEnVZEMyrvKA7AaH4C7H2J 4VoAnRSLPn7iy5nxTlnf3ak9cUGxB4ty =o5ni -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
