Open Stack

On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:58 -0400
Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

> > I think that there is no such 'promise' for reviewing in a large
> > OSS. If your code can't get enough reviewers, your code might be not
> > useful enough for the project. It's sorta evolutionary theory. The
> > better code has the better chance to be merged quickly. The features
> > are prioritized fairly.
> 
> Hmm, I disagree. What is actually more likely is that the clique of
> developers that the proposing author is friendly/familiar will review
> their merge proposal before other ones. It's not really about good
> code versus bad code. Again, it's about prioritizing the reviews for
> folks that follow the procedures the community has agreed on.

Well, I can't deny there is such behavior. But if you always do it
(review code on something like friendly-based, not about the
usufulness of the code), you lost trust from other developers. Your
review would losts the value. Surely, we don't vote such developers.
No good developer wants to be such?

> If the community wants to change the procedures that it has agreed on,
> it should do so at the next summit. I *think* that's what Vishy was
> saying and that I agree with.

Yeah, but discussion on the mailing list before the summit is useful
(developers who can't attend the summit are able to discuss, I might
not be able to make it too).