On 28 feb, 17:26, Jernej Azarija <azi.std...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello! > > I have noticed (at least in the fields to which I made some small > contributions) that the number of reviewers is arbitrary. Sometimes there > is only one reviewer sometimes two, three.. > > I cannot speak for others, but I wouldn't want to be the only reviewer of a > patch since I am quick to overlook things and make stupid assumptions.
Then review a patch and, before giving positive review, take a mental break and review it again :) > Hence I am wondering, if you ever considered putting some norm on the > number of reviewers for new patches? Like 3 reviewers before the patch is > taken into consideration? I think it is ok as it is. If you require say three reviewers then things would slow down too much. If there is something tricky you can always say that you have looked here and there but that this or that part should be reviewed by another person. > This appears to be the standard for research publications and since one > would want to use Sage as part of their research project it seems like a > sane option as well. > > As is, I am not 100% comfortable completely relying on Sage for results > related to mathematical research. One may also think that with the at least one reviewer rule the sage library may have more eyes looking at its code than some of the underlying software... > Best, > > Jernej -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
