<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><BR><DIV><DIV>On Jul 3, 2007, at 9:53 AM, Jeff Eaton wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><P style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><FONT face="Helvetica" size="4" style="font: 14.0px Helvetica">The fundamental problem, though, is that a core committer is also 'the final reviewer,' the last line of defense between Drupal core and conceptually flawed code. The system works best when core committers don't *have* to spend a lot of time on that part of their role. And that's what breaks when the queue gets saturated with premature RTBC's. Their role as 'final reviewer' sucks up more and more time, and fewer patches can get the attention necessary to make the commit happen.</FONT></P> </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><DIV>perhaps it would be helpful if we could somehow clarify further what the core committers are looking for in that final review -- because if there's a misunderstanding there, that could lead to problems.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>as i said previously regarding the deletion API: i had two of drupal's finest coders looking at the code. i had half a dozen usability reviews. it complied with the information listed at "Tips for contributing to the core". Yet, somehow, all this wasn't enough. what was the missing link in the dev cycle of that patch?? i think clarifying that could be helpful.</DIV></BODY></HTML>