gozer at ectoplasm
Apr 16, 2010, 12:41 PM
Post #3 of 3
On 10-04-16 15:01 , Fred Moyer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
> <pgollucci [at] p6m7g8> wrote:
>> Thats Commit Then Review. Its a VC we can always revert things.
> True, but I think that reverting things rarely (if ever) happens.
>> The RTC (Review Then Committ) suggestion is only for new committers while
>> they get acclimated. Unless its some massive architectural change which will
>> probably be prose explanation anyway.
> I think this is still worthwhile even for veteran committers (note
> that I'm not one of those!). Once code is committed, I think there is
> less motivation to review it, but that's just my opinion.
Yes, but there is nothing wrong with asking for a few set of eyeballs to
have a look at code before checking it in.
I am very comfortable complaining or reverting what I think is bad code
getting checked in. OTOH, if you want to post patches and ask for review
*before* you commit, I don't mind at all.
I think it's a matter of coder's confidence in the code in question.
But yeah, it's good to clarify that if you got a commit bit, you don't
*need* to wait for +1s, review, or anything else before landing changes.
Philippe M. Chiasson GPG: F9BFE0C2480E7680 1AE53631CB32A107 88C3A5A5