On 01/23/2016 09:41 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
....
Related to this, I always found it a bit surprising we perform so much
activity on the patch author side before submission. Part of me thinks
reviewers should take one quick glance at the interdiff before the final
version lands and should be gate keepers. To not do this is somewhat
undermining the review process.
I am not the busiest reviewer out there but I review a decent number of
patches. I can't think of _ever_ wanting to look at the interdiff resulted
from a rebase.
Also, I believe we have data showing that most of our reviews are done by a
relatively small portion of people. I'd like to humbly suggest that
changing processes to put even more burden on the reviewers may not necessarily
be the best course of action going forward.
...
Cheers,
Ehsan
Yeah. This is rather subjective view, but I believe that optimizing reviewers'
workflows and reducing the time they need to spend on a bug
would increase overall productivity more than optimizing patch authors' workflows. Landing code is not too often blocked on patch author but is often
blocked on reviewer.
Of course the best would be to improve all the workflows.
-Oli
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
