reviews

[Kevin Ottens]

On Sunday 16 March 2014 10:16:17 David Faure wrote:
> On Sunday 23 February 2014 16:12:58 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> I tend to agree. Initially it was a good thing because most frameworks
> committers were newcomers to that code, but by now some of them know what
> they are doing :-)
> OTOH it works this way in Qt and it increases quality overall, so I'm a bit
> on the fence.

Note that review doesn't necessarily means "go through reviewboard", that's in 
fact something we thought about:
http://community.kde.org/Frameworks/Policies#Frameworks_commits_are_reviewed

> At least I don't mind if "trivial changes" go in directly, especially since
> I also read commits...

That means defining what is trivial though. :-)

Now, I think it's also more a question of "are you the maintainer of what 
you're touching?"
For instance, Luigi is obviously our kdoctools master...

Regards.
-- 
Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20140316/4783465b/attachment.sig>