2011/3/28 Tim Starling <tstarl...@wikimedia.org>: > By definition, our volunteer developers have lives outside of > MediaWiki. We have to fit in with their schedules. I don't think we > should give them a kick in the teeth just because they committed > something on Sunday and have to go to school on Monday. > > If a commit is insecure, or changes interfaces in a way that will be > disruptive to other developers, or breaks key functionality, then > sure, we should revert it right away. There's no need to wait 24 > hours. But I don't think we need to be issuing death sentences for > typos in comments. > +1
Reverting is a blunt instrument and should only be used when appropriate. I think it's perhaps a bit underused currently, but that doesn't mean we should swing to the other end of the spectrum. Reverting a revision is appropriate if it breaks things or if its presence in the repository causes other problems, like Tim said. Also, if a revision is problematic and can't be fixed quickly, it should be reverted, not left in a fixme state for two weeks. OTOH reverting things for minor issues is needlessly disruptive (not to mention demotivating), and reverting a *volunteer* developer's revision simply because *paid* reviewers (most of them are paid anyway) didn't get around to reviewing it is the kind of dickish behavior that will scare off volunteers very effectively. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
