š
Original date posted:2013-10-04
š Original message:On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
> I'd like to make a small request - when submitting large, complex pieces
> of work for review, please either submit it as one giant squashed change,
> or be an absolute fascist about keeping commits logically clean and
> separated.
>
I'll try harder to be a fascist (it doesn't come naturally to me). HUGE
thanks for taking the time to review the fee changes in detail.
RE: using Review Board:
I'm all for using better tools, if they will actually get used. If a
potential reviewer has to sign up to create a Review Board account or learn
Yet Another Tool, then I think it would be counter-productive: we'd just
make the pool of reviewers even smaller than it already is.
Are there good examples of other open source software projects successfully
incentivizing review that we can copy?
For example, I'm wondering if maybe for the 0.9 release and onwards the
"Thank you" section should thank only people who have significantly helped
test or review other people's code.
--
--
Gavin Andresen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131005/b234c2f6/attachment.html>;
Gavin Andresen [ARCHIVE] /
npub1s4ā¦d44kw
2023-06-07 15:07:21
in reply to nevent1qā¦m95a
Author Public Key
npub1s4lj77xuzcu7wy04afcr487f0r3za0f8n2775xrpkld2sv639mjqsd44kwSeen on
wss://relay.noswhere.comPublished at
2023-06-07 15:07:21Event JSON
{
"id": "65480e67011957eb8b921d9cfc5f05548f48132f7dae33ac222a805228a956ff",
"pubkey": "857f2f78dc1639e711f5ea703a9fc978e22ebd279abdea1861b7daa833512ee4",
"created_at": 1686150441,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c5a68e6f904af4bb9ba26063f532146fb896046fee8fed7dd28cab691644cf81",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"17a99f3c4a9028a48d64c26d65ee5e014fe561766dddb789418438f341eab331",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e7bcf4d0ea05abfd67a8230b26a8de70392ff0b8b26ddf0f858224059aff100b"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2013-10-04\nš Original message:On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e I'd like to make a small request - when submitting large, complex pieces\n\u003e of work for review, please either submit it as one giant squashed change,\n\u003e or be an absolute fascist about keeping commits logically clean and\n\u003e separated.\n\u003e\n\nI'll try harder to be a fascist (it doesn't come naturally to me). HUGE\nthanks for taking the time to review the fee changes in detail.\n\nRE: using Review Board:\n\nI'm all for using better tools, if they will actually get used. If a\npotential reviewer has to sign up to create a Review Board account or learn\nYet Another Tool, then I think it would be counter-productive: we'd just\nmake the pool of reviewers even smaller than it already is.\n\nAre there good examples of other open source software projects successfully\nincentivizing review that we can copy?\n\nFor example, I'm wondering if maybe for the 0.9 release and onwards the\n\"Thank you\" section should thank only people who have significantly helped\ntest or review other people's code.\n\n-- \n--\nGavin Andresen\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131005/b234c2f6/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "df212655c4eab6036badec01bf8b42a0e0f1c198e7b27c92db76d31be02637cf400a59d6e1d4c8e2674da860e06d117f44a6050a84eb0d7c24af3eee8756a9c3"
}