Hi Laurent, Am Donnerstag, 28. März 2019, 14:33:59 CET schrieb laurent Montel: > For example I works all days on kde (pim or other) when I wake up, or at > noon after my lunch or the evening, I will not wait several days for a > review because nobody has time to do it. > > (For example I make ~ 15 commits by days on pim/ruqola/framework, I don't > want to wait several days/weeks until someone wants to review my patchs)
Something might be lost in translation here, do you think, because you work daily on code of KDE projects, and other people (so potential reviewers) do not, this is an argument to do instant pushes of unreviewed commits? While I understand one can get impatient if not getting instant review of changes one would like to depend on with further changes (I know this well :) ), still this seems a flawed argument at least for part-time-contributors based KDE projects, where the people one co-operates with only have time now and then, like once per week. It could be seen unfair & ignorant to them if one simply ignores their opinion, because one has more time reserved/ available. Not sure where this is from, but often I have seen an unwritten policy applied where people for a patch uploaded for review after one week of no response add a ping and then wait another week, before finally pushing the change. To me this seems a fair and reasonable policy, only ignores people who are on vacation for some more weeks or otherwise inactive, but I have not seen that ever been a real issue. Given the actual purpose of this thread, I would be more curious how you have CI integrated in your workflow? And where things could be improved, to prevent the current state of unhappiness for people who care about CI some more? Given you said you work daily on KDE projects, it seems that the brokeness of those projects on the KDE CI has slipped your attention. So how does this happen, and how could this be prevented, other than people having to hunt you down on irc and tell you :) Cheers Friedrich
