On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote: > 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. A system like that, which still trusts committers to make the call that rubber stamping is appropriate, sounds significantly more workable to me than one which required review even for trivial changes. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4