> Codereview has it’s issues. It's normal to find fault when things aren't as convenient as one wishes, but in this case I doubt that we could replace codereview and, most importantly, the reviewers, with something better.
If there is a better option, I'll be happy to go along with it, I'm not an intentional reactionary. But I also don't want to lose sight of the fact that to me its "Go release" on multiple "Plan 9 platforms" that I find appealing. There are far more competent people out there to deal with all the other options - although netbsd/386 is also of active interest to me - and I'd rather help where I am able to contribute what little skills I have. As for highlighting the Plan 9 issues specifically, I had a brief conversation, I think it was with Andrew Gerrand, where the conclusion was that we - the Plan 9 community - were most welcome to use the issue tracker for Plan 9 issues and it was more or less up to us to make sure that the issues were labelled correctly. I'm not familiar with the issue tracker's innards, but I can investigate this further if we think it would be the right path to follow. I do hope it is. ++L
