review process

[Gerald Pfeifer]

[ gcc-patches -> gcc; please omit the former when replying! ]

On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Fergus Henderson wrote:
>>> 	- define a new category of "self-approve" developers?
> Well, the difference is that you're only allowed to approve your own
> patches, not someone else's patches.  The intent here is to create
> a new position which is less trusted than a normal "maintainer",
> and whose approval powers are thus significantly limited --
> limited to only approving their own patches, only after these patches
> have been reviewed by another human, and only after a one-week delay.

So, wouldn't it be more natural, in some way, to have maintainers that
may approve all patches _but_ their own?  (I'm not sure how well reviews
by arbitrary third parties would work, both procedurally and related to
quality.)

Managing droped patches using Bugzilla sounds like a good idea, and in
fact I have suggested it at least twice in the past.

My message at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-03/msg01529.html essentially
has all three suggestions which came up in this thread, BTW. :->

Gerald

-- 
Gerald "Jerry"   pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at   http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/