Has there been any consideration of growing the core team to help with review bandwidth? I ask only because that resulting responsibility to the community can drive additional review activity. Just worried that only 1x +2 could cause issues with code being merged on a project this large that could potentially break things or clash with other opinions or standards of how it should be written/implemented? It concerns me that it makes it easier to overlook larger things in more substantial patches. I guess as you say, there needs to be accountability re not always going for the single +2 when the patch is of that sort of size and you need a second opinion?
Beth > On 28 Feb 2017, at 10:09, Rob Cresswell <robert.cressw...@outlook.com> wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > Horizon is moving to requiring only a single core review for code approval. > Note that cores are not obliged to approve on a single +2; if a core would > like a second opinion for patches that are complex or high risk, that is also > fine. > > We still require at least one of the core reviewers or contributor on a patch > to be from separate companies however. For example, if a patch is authored by > someone from Cisco, then I could not (as a Cisco employee) +2+w the patch by > myself; it would require at least another core +2. > > This should help us move smaller patches along quicker. > > Rob > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
