On Tue, 19 May 2026 14:40:14 GMT, Andy Goryachev <[email protected]> wrote:
> > and all questions have been answered. > > they weren't, I was waiting for your response (not the first time, I might > add). I still don't know which question I allegedly didn't answer. > But you do bring a good point - we should indicate more clearly that the > discussion is not over. My understanding is that all who substantially > participated in the review (or raised substantial concern) need to mark a PR > as Approved, or explicitly say that a change is requested. Also, if there is > no response for some time, we usually add a comment. I don't think that such a policy would make life easier in practice. For example, I sometimes comment on an isolated aspect of a PR, but without the intention of reviewing all of it. Having a rule that basically blocks integration of a PR because someone substantially participated in a discussion without the intention of explicitly approving or disapproving makes a slow process even slower. It's probably enough to just clearly state when you think the discussion is not finished. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2091#issuecomment-4496779757
