>> Anyway, if we're going to change policies around submitting code, I >> would much rather see peer review become a habit than adopt a tool >> like PQM. > > The part where I'm skeptical about such a policy is that there might > be a shortage of reviewers. What if a patch on Rietvield doesn't find > a reviewer for a month or so? Many patches in the tracker sit there > for years without any committer reviewing them.
The tracker has zero support for efficient patch review. Tools like Rietveld and Review Board are designed for efficient patch and code review, and not much else. I don't think you can use the fact that people find it hard to work with a tool that makes it hard to do things as an argument against using a tool that makes it easy to do things... (has anyone compared Rietveld and Review Board, btw?) </F> _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
