Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-reef-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-reef-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1267A18D3E for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 19:02:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 33312 invoked by uid 500); 9 Feb 2016 19:02:56 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-reef-dev-archive@reef.apache.org Received: (qmail 33280 invoked by uid 500); 9 Feb 2016 19:02:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@reef.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@reef.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@reef.apache.org Received: (qmail 33263 invoked by uid 99); 9 Feb 2016 19:02:55 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 19:02:55 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E4A821A01A4 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 19:02:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=weimo-de.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mx1-us-east.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jc_mNzYOFxwa for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 19:02:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf0-f181.google.com (mail-pf0-f181.google.com [209.85.192.181]) by mx1-us-east.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-east.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 1EC2C429A6 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 19:02:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-f181.google.com with SMTP id e127so36409379pfe.3 for ; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:02:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=weimo-de.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/onM3sdLv4J/QzO/n27pYvkR+gkeUg5HfF2TURwmn04=; b=d1tliAHENxqinXx789aXTSRMXAX+s5uJKemR4JaH67pZbLbZaFkoPJdi+Z0aktD0tv KIZYiMz4TtJsEXS5wcY0cHqRmMgnbvn8adm7nT+qy1RVDMj1g2qASJlNcdPE/0/FPw8S IdMLLwdgMkYOs0fpeeEy/wXa/mt6CfWgmTacndHrxob9yLaOMwejOvPnnkCtONPMs3PB 3LeCqsA02k70VEguVZs45tE5SAtdj8n/L42XFKMtqs1j7njadtNWv8NprO1Flr6ACPz2 M1wcZsVHFrUYxMWfyPYLyMsw5tvkXgR8gJQ7GUn6JLrON1/yF1R5qB2bh3SXKQgsvwkS I+4A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/onM3sdLv4J/QzO/n27pYvkR+gkeUg5HfF2TURwmn04=; b=EYrFEUAb/pUs4hD4BRGMLEOUFS8fBz4WX6zuGnAkLNdSdPizIy/oCjG1mm3b5GJlcr dPmpnaO8245wjRthzPQTm0QKOpIaRT3Sga70/TeL9gW17IQHgpYwPConBlQb00Cr7NFA W1qzq/ZkN4oFBSbWKlEXAry2PZAMz3Q7lJTlVn6ZkVw3y5GuAK1f7aRvJ6GWnTOnbs1B ww98zTQsahN/sHS6eSI6KRdWvUqZGlxWSUNHQvowcjN795fW5eWiMj2TvHQhDQT2IQiM J0MRfBmLpqM0hRJwCDutJWVNDLGeWAU5/45safonoFULrO3XH0lrhv3iNLE98CQQ5r2H NuyA== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORfJbXNt1isPlIy+eI5TZfmlCo6pX8N1y+c8h9gFpave/folTSwk8K1OMPlxZVOFA== X-Received: by 10.98.16.86 with SMTP id y83mr52318383pfi.45.1455044572241; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:02:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:4898:f0:52:74:960:c642:4f? ([2001:4898:80e8:1::6e7]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 1sm52367155pfm.10.2016.02.09.11.02.51 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 09 Feb 2016 11:02:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: code review To: dev@reef.apache.org References: From: Markus Weimer Message-ID: <56BA37DB.6080808@weimo.de> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:02:51 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +1 on asking people to help with the reviews. I believe we do this today already, right? Now, there is a line we shouldn't cross, and that is the idea of having "maintainers" or "owners" of different parts of the code base. The code is in whole owned by the community, and every committer should feel free to commit to all parts of the code base. In fact, it is beneficial for community health to review outside of our usual area of expertise, to make sure that the code as a whole is most broadly understood. Makes sense? Markus On 2016-02-09 08:17, Yunseong Lee wrote: > +1 :-) > > Thanks for the great suggestion, Julia! > > Regards, > Yunseong > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Byung-Gon Chun wrote: > >> Sounds good to me! >> -Gon >> >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Julia Wang (QIUHE) < >> Qiuhe.Wang@microsoft.com >>> wrote: >> >>> When we use CodeFlow or some other tools, we used to specify required and >>> optional code reviewers. This is to make sure the modified code are >>> reviewed by people who also worked on that code before, or who are also >>> working on the related portions. When we send a PR for review though >>> GitHub, there is no place for us to specify who are the required >> reviewers. >>> I would suggest us to use @alias to specify required reviewers when >>> seeding a PR for review. In this way, people won't miss any code review. >>> For those who are not mentioned, they can always be optional reviewers. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Julia >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Byung-Gon Chun >> >