RetroSearch Browse

Fri Oct 1 18:31:38 CEST 2010 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-October/104376.html

On Sep 30, 2010, at 01:46 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:

>Once we have a good workflow in place we would have to start shifting
>our development culture towards requiring a review of code no matter
>who the author is (which I support doing).

I should note one other thing, in reference to my previous posting about
reviews.  Launchpad does have a backdoor for getting changes in without
formal review.  It's called "rubber stamping" and shows up in commit messages,
e.g.:

    $VCS commit -m"[rs=me] Fix trivial misspelling in comment"

You can also get a rubber stamp from a reviewer:

    Alice: can you review my branch that fixes all incorrect uses of "it's"?
    Bob: If that's your only change, I trust you.  rs=me
    Alice: $VCS commit -m"[rs=bob] The Grammar Nanny strikes again"

Usually rubber stamps are reserved for cases where the fix really is trivial,
or a change is large but mechanical, or when no reviewer can be found for a
time-sensitive fix (very rare).  You at least need to record the rubber stamp
in the commit message, and be prepared to defend it if it trips up someone's
post-commit eyeball filter.

-Barry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20101001/7d0dee34/attachment.pgp>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-October/104376.html below:

[Python-Dev] We should be using a tool for code reviews