On Tue, Apr 24, 2018, at 12:42, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> Hello.
>
>
> On 04/23/2018 06:05 PM, Stephen Houston wrote:
> > In our meeting today we discussed the need for more patch/commit reviewing
> > and that there should be rules in place as to what should require a review
> > before being
On 24 April 2018 at 19:42, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> Hello.
>
>
> On 04/23/2018 06:05 PM, Stephen Houston wrote:
>> In our meeting today we discussed the need for more patch/commit reviewing
>> and that there should be rules in place as to what should require a review
>>
Hello.
On 04/23/2018 06:05 PM, Stephen Houston wrote:
> In our meeting today we discussed the need for more patch/commit reviewing
> and that there should be rules in place as to what should require a review
> before being pushed into master.
I was one of the persons who pushed for the
As some are aware, I've been trialing this for some time, and with two
small exceptions, every patch I've written for the past month (92 patches)
has been reviewed and landed by a third party, ie. someone who is not me.
Half of these have been submitted and reviewed through phabricator and are
In our meeting today we discussed the need for more patch/commit reviewing
and that there should be rules in place as to what should require a review
before being pushed into master. These were some suggestions:
Any commit that:
A. Is not a fix or a feature planned for the next release
B. Is