On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 3:57 PM David Jarvie <djar...@kde.org> wrote: > I agree. Mandatory reviews might work if there is a team of active people > working on a project, but if there is only one person with real knowledge of > the code
We do have common ownership of code, so if there is only one person with real knowledge of the code that is a problem in of itself... A problem which really should get solved... For example by having mandatory reviews so someone actually has to review code they know just as little about as everyone else, so in turn they now know a bit more and can more confidently do reviews ;) Now to be sure, I am not certain mandatory reviews are in fact the answer to the problem at hand, nor if they would in fact be possible to implement reliable. From personal experience I'll say that reviews almost always are worth it, even for the simple typo fixes. And I also almost find someone to give at least a casual review even when they know nothing of the code base. Sometimes perhaps even "I couldn't say if this change is good, but the code looks correct at least +1" is better than nobody having looked at the code at all. It ultimately also becomes a matter of busfactor. If nobody ever has reason to look at code with a single principal author the busfactor will never improve. HS
