Am 08.08.2016 um 04:03 schrieb Daniel Glus
<danielhglus(a)gmail.com>om>:
Strainu <strainu10(a)gmail.com> writes:
Regarding the proposed solutions, I am wary of
the WMF "taking over"
the development of pwb (call me old fashion if you like, but I'm still
not over 2014). Also, more reviewers without a clear direction do not
help. I used to have +2 a while ago, but I dropped out anyway because
I couldn't understand where the main developers were taking pwb.
I completely agree with you in the case of larger changes (e.g. architecture changes or
feature requests), but I think there could be more reviewers to help with smaller patches,
such as trivial or minor bug fixes. Surely one doesn't need a vision or direction to
recognize that we should be keeping up with breaking API changes, or to help with the
backlog of obsolete patches? (I'd help, but, again, a good patch reviewing guide would
be immensely helpful.)
As I mentioned 6 mentioned 6 months ago there are a lot of trivial patches and
improvements for the framework as well as for scripts to be reviewed. I am unhappy of this
delay an ask me to fork and create my own branch because in my production copy most files
are changed and it is hard to keep an overview.
Anyway we have a lot of +2 coder but only a few who reviews the patches. We could give
some guys +2 rights. There are some trivial patches to get experience in reviewing.
I know reviewing treaters sets is more difficult and time consuming. It is easier to write
the code than reviewing it when trying to understand the proposed improvement and its
code. Any test suite helps.
I would invite you to participate.
Best
Xqt