Hi all,

I have seen it said that one very useful activity is reviewing patches. Of
the issues in the tracker, it is not immediately clear to me what is
required of such a review. Many of these patches appear to be bundled in
with feature requests, leaving the question of whether the review it judging
the quality of the code or the merits of the feature request. I do realise
that these issues have probably been previously discussed on this list.
Let's take as an example the following issue:

  http://bugs.python.org/issue1818

This has obviously been around for a while, but not been implemented for
some reason. There are no links in any of the comments to any email threads
regarding its merits, however I recognise the name of the submitter. This
makes me think the patch is probably implementing desirable functionality.
However, it has no priority set, which makes me think that the community
hasn't yet given it any kind of 'status', insofar as a priority can stand in
for desirability.

It seems to make sense that code quality reviews should be separated from
feature request reviews (quality code evaluation vs desirability of function
evaluation) but I don't see how this occurs. I feel a lot more qualified to
evaluate code quality than desirability of function.

Questions like this make it difficult for someone in my position, who is
happy to tackle 'whatever needs to be done', to begin the task of patch
reviews. While I'm not sure that a formal or semi-formal approval process
would make anything better, I think it would be good if there were some kind
of 'executive review' process by which an issue could be marked as being a
good thing or not.

Regards,
-Tennessee

-- 
--------------------------------------------------
Tennessee Leeuwenburg
http://myownhat.blogspot.com/
"Don't believe everything you think"
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to