A refresh of the checklist sounds good to me and I think it corresponds well to all the changes and improvements happening lately on the project. I am not a committer so I will refrain from any big comments but as a software engineer, I would say I am well aware and a fan of the practices you shared.
Best regards, Ekaterina On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 14:38, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Or maybe to add some template with a couple of specific questions > that > > > > need to be answered? > > > > > > > > > Agreed. > > > We do have > > > https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/development/how_to_review.html > > > > > > We should have a summary of and link to that page in the JIRA "--> > > > Ready to Commit" transition. > > > And maybe even make mention of it in the "--> Start Review" transition. > > > > Even better, reference to the full checklist sounds good to me > > +1 > > > We can also improve that Review doc… > > IMHO there's a lot we can take from > https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/ > > For example, our documentation doesn't address > - Picking the Best Reviewers (from competence to collaboration across > company > silos) > - Design & Complexity (it is only briefly touched on under 'General', also > could extend to processes-at-large for bugs vs improvements vs CEPs) > - Commit message and CHANGES.txt > - Review communication, from etiquette to where can the review happen (in > the jira ticket, GH commit messages, GH PRs) > - How to resolve/escalate disagreements, challenges, disappearing people, > etc > > The first point about "who reviews" has been touched on in other threads > related to project governance. > > I suspect a lot of the current Review doc can be first expanded to be more > thorough with our current practices. Beyond that is there anyone in the > google doc (that is relevant, e.g. not in-person reviews) that anyone > objects to? >
