Justin asked me, as the group's official Grumpy Old Man, to send a note reminding people about the importance of reviewing patches early. Here it is. As I see it, we've historically had two problems with reviews. (1) Patches that don't get reviewed at all. (2) Patches that have to be re-worked continually due to late reviews. We've made a lot of progress on (1), especially with the addition of more maintainers, so this is about (2). As a patch gets older, it becomes increasingly likely that it will be rebased and regression tests will have to be re-run because of merge conflicts. This isn't a problem for features to which Red Hat has graciously assigned more than one developer, as they review each others' work and the patch gets merged quickly (sometimes before other interested parties have even had a chance to see it in the queue but that's a different problem). However, it creates a problem for *every other patch*, which might now have to rebased etc. - even those that are older and more important to users and up against tighter deadlines. This "priority inversion" can often be avoided if people who intend to review a patch would do so sooner, so that all of the review re-work can be done before new merge conflicts are created. Given the differences in time zones throughout our group, each round of such unnecessary work can cost an entire day, leading to even more potential for further merge conflicts. It's a vicious cycle that we need to break. Please, get all of those complaints about tabs and spaces and variable names in *early*, and help us keep the improvements flowing to our users. _______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://supercolony.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
