Graham Percival wrote Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:40 AM
How much oversight should the Frog patches receive? These patches have been reviewed by Carl. They compile cleanly, adhere to our code standards (to the extent that Carl understands them), and appear to fix the bug. I see three proposals: 1) Let Carl commit whatever patches he has reviewed. 2) Require that each patch be reviewed by a "Core developer" (Han-Wen, Jan, or Joe). 3) Let Carl commit whatever he's fairly certain is good, and ask for help with whatever he doesn't understand. If somebody like Werner or Reinhold says "sure, looks ok", then he goes ahead and commits.
I'd go for (3). Carl can surely deal with patches which change doc strings, the current task assigned to frogs, without asking for a code review. Serious changes to code should go through code review, of course, like those submitted by any developer, but I guess there will not be many of those from the frog team, at least not initially. Let's leave anything in-between to Carl's judgement - if he screws up I'm sure he'll quickly adjust his criteria! Trevor
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
