On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Matt W. Benjamin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > I don't think number of reviewers is the limiting factor. For example, I > submitted a change to enhance Simon's contributed red-black tree. Simon > himself reviewed it, had no objections to committing the change. I don't > care if the change is committed, but I don't think you can legitimately fault > non-present reviewers. > > That's not to say we don't need more reviewers, we surely do. If you'd like > me to review work more frequently, a good way would be to ask me to do so. > Gerrit has a feature to "add reviewer" which can be used for this purpose. > > More broadly, I have written a lot of code for OpenAFS over the years, much > of it not committed. > So have others (e.g., Hartmut). There are simply too many reasons to list > why those contributions cannot be committed. Most saliently, I've been told > not to send more XCB changesets, dirformat changesets, other random > YFS-funded changes, for many good reasons. They are all to do with larger > change management policy, such as that governing afs3-stds.
I don't see any reason changes not yet standardized can't be sent, but simply as long as the policy of OpenAFS is to be compliant with what is standardized as AFS3, the stuff can't be merged until the standards are ratified, and will sit in gerrit, reviewers or not. -- Derrick _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
