On 27 July 2015 at 11:37, R. David Murray <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote: > My goal here is to *transfer* the knowledge of what makes a good review > process and a good patch from the existing committers to new committers, > and therefore acquire new committers. +1000 :) A few years back, I wrote this patch review guide for work: https://beaker-project.org/dev/guide/writing-a-patch.html#reviewing-a-patch Helping to create a similarly opinionated guide to assist reviewers for CPython has been kicking around on my todo list ever since, but it's a lot easier to create that kind of guide when you're the appointed development lead on a relatively small project produced almost entirely through paid development - I wrote it one afternoon, uploaded it to gerrit.beaker-project.org, and the only folks I needed to get to review it were the other full-time developers on the Beaker team. I don't think that would be the right way to create such a guide for a volunteer driven project like CPython, but steering a more collaborative community discussion would require substantially more time than it took me to put the Beaker one together. 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