On Saturday 08 September 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Saturday 08 September 2007, Alec Warner wrote: > > On 9/8/07, Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > After much toiling, Infra has finally got the commits list active. > > > > > > Kudos to you all! > > > > > > What we now need is the installation of some kind of peer review. For > > > example add to the recruitment guide a recommendation to watch the > > > recruitee one mentored on the commits mailing list. > > > All other commits should be reviewed. Arch work is normally > > > done in a team and all teams watch each other, so that works quite > > > good, as keywords are done wrong far too often. > > > Any ideas about an efficient way to establish such a process? > > > > Can we see how often the list gets used first? Maybe things will > > improve in the next bit of time and we don't need any extra formal > > process. I have no problem adding to the guide that mentors should > > watch mentees commits (that is technically already required even > > though many do not). I'd rather have a bunch of people pointing out > > problems on commits in an ad-hoc manner than have 'All Commits > > Reviewed(TM)' ;) > > buy Alex a beer
and then buy Alec one :x -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
