From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Reviewing changes Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:13:33 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87y6zggnmz.fsf@red-bean.com> <87d4grbcc0.fsf@red-bean.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1227147235 29940 80.91.229.12 (20 Nov 2008 02:13:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 02:13:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 20 03:14:57 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L2z4J-0003Mg-63 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:14:55 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52864 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L2z3A-000714-0z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:13:44 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L2z36-00070n-RZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:13:40 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L2z32-00070O-9R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:13:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44795 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L2z32-00070L-3u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:13:36 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]:35564 helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L2z30-0004kf-T7; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:13:34 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhIFAPRWJElMCrcy/2dsb2JhbACBbdBxgnmBFA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,636,1220241600"; d="scan'208";a="30079005" Original-Received: from 76-10-183-50.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([76.10.183.50]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 19 Nov 2008 21:13:34 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 30B047FEA; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 21:13:33 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87d4grbcc0.fsf@red-bean.com> (Karl Fogel's message of "Wed, 19 Nov 2008 17:06:07 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:105840 Archived-At: > I thought log-accum.pl was the answer to this, in CVS-land? (It's been By "thought" I guess you meant "hoped"? ;-) > We don't need to have a fully-specified, formal review system to benefit > from more frequent informal reviews. Many projects get by on just > having the diff+log appear in the same email -- then the review "system" > is simply people reading their email. It works quite well. Agreed. Improving the diff&commit messages is just a good thing. If it encourages reviews, even better. > If there's no agreement to have a review process, I can simply ignore > your review. Of course. Would that be a problem? Stefan