On 4/10/2016 6:37 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
Excerpts from Matt Riedemann's message of 2016-04-09 06:42:54 -0700:
There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand
and is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for
the disagreement). And there is disincentive in -1ing a change for the
wrong reasons (silly nits or asking questions for understanding). I ask
a lot of questions in a lot of changes and I don't vote on those because
it would be inappropriate.
Why is disagreement a negative thing? IMO, reviewers who agree too much
are just part of the echo chamber.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
I'm not saying disagreement is a negative thing, I was saying there are
times when I've seen people -1 for crazy nits, e.g. there should be a
blank line between the bug ref and change-id in the commit message, or
for asking questions for understanding (which, btw, I'm fine with -1 for
'add a comment because this is complicated and I didn't get it at
first'). And I'm also not crazy about piling on or agreeing with
everything either. My point is I think it's appropriate in a lot of
cases to just not vote but still comment.
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
