CI system maintainability

[Kevin Ottens]

Hello,

On Thursday, 28 March 2019 11:27:44 CET Daniel Vrátil wrote:
> I'm completely fine with mandatory code review for everything and I'd be
> happy to have this in PIM. I think the biggest problem in PIM to overcome
> will be finding the reviewers - I dare say I'm currently the only one who
> has at least a little idea about what's going on in Akonadi, so getting for
> instance Laurent to review my Akonadi patches might be hard - same for me
> reviewing Laurent's KMail patches. This will require non-trivial amount of
> effort for all members of the community to gain deeper understanding of the
> other components within the project and a willingness to step up and do a
> code review even if they don't feel 100% comfortable with the code base.
> But I believe that in the long run the benefits clearly out-weight the
> cost.

This! :-)
 
> Btw we practice this policy at work and I do truly appreciate it, not only
> as a huge learning experience but so many times just having a second pair
> of eyes to glance over my code has revealed issues that sometimes almost
> make me question my career choice as a programmer :-) I think this is
> especially important for projects like PIM, where most of us contribute at
> work in between waiting for CI and replying to 15 Slack threads or in the
> evening after a long day....

And this too of course.

I fully support this message. ;-)

Cheers.
-- 
Kevin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20190328/59ff97dc/attachment.sig>