Re: Incentives for review

[Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>]

Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:

> A good middle ground may be to provide incentives for review. 
> How?  I’m
> not sure exactly, but first by making it clear that review is 
> makes the
> project move forward and is invaluable.  You once proposed 
> having
> ‘Reviewed-By’ tags to acknowledge non-committer reviews, and I 
> think
> that would be one step in that direction.  Perhaps there are 
> other
> things we could do?

I was thinking in the opposite direction: not incentives to 
recognize reviewers but a closer relationship to the patch 
submitters, i.e. “patch buddies” or mentorship.  If I made myself 
officially responsible for reviewing commits by Simon and all 
commits touching R then I’m more likely to actually do the review 
for these patches.

Reviews done by people who are not committers could also be 
acknowledged, of course, but applying the patch (sometimes 
manually because of conflicts) is still manual work that can feel 
like a chore if the committer doesn’t feel a connection to the 
patch or the person who submitted it.

-- 
Ricardo