Author: Warren Togami Jr. 2013-10-05 04:02:45
Published on: 2013-10-05T04:02:45+00:00
In an email thread from October 2013 on the Bitcoin-development mailing list, Gavin Andresen discussed the process of submitting large and complex work for review. Mike Hearn requested that such work either be submitted as one squashed change or kept logically clean and separated. Andresen agreed to try harder to keep commits separate and thanked Hearn for reviewing the fee changes in detail. Andresen also brought up the idea of using Review Board, but expressed concern that potential reviewers might be deterred by having to sign up for another account or learn a new tool. He asked if there were examples of other open source projects successfully incentivizing code review. One suggestion he had was to thank only those who significantly helped test or review other people's code in future releases' "Thank you" sections. Warren recommended reading the section under "14) Using Reported-by:, Tested-by:, Reviewed-by: and Suggested-by:" in the kernel.org documentation on submitting patches, which may be helpful in their process as well.
Updated on: 2023-06-07T17:27:11.821224+00:00