[development] What about reviewing patches?
drupal at dwwright.net
Thu Aug 14 18:15:47 UTC 2008
On Aug 14, 2008, at 10:29 AM, Angela Byron wrote:
> True. But exactly *one* person can do something about the RTBC
> queue. 2,000+ people can do something about the CNR queue.
> Let's have a community outcry about the RTBC queue once the
> situation is reversed, and we have 325 patches waiting for core
> committers' blessing, and only 40 patches that need community
> review. Until then, we have work to do.
As someone who's done an awful lot of core patch reviews over the
years, I feel compelled to chime in here.
If we've got a single bottleneck on the RTBC queue, how is mustering
the forces of 2000+ people to exacerbate that problem going to help
anything? Things sitting in RTBC are a *HUGE* waste of developer
time. The sheer volume of hours wasted by things having to be re-
rolled since they were RTBC once but no one committed for months is
mind boggling. Not to mention the cascading effect of other patches
that are constantly re-rolled when something finally does get in.
I'm certainly not motivated to work in the core issue queue much
anymore, except out of necessity. I've just wasted far too many
hours re-rolling, re-wrangling reviews, etc, etc, trying to get
something in. So long as things sit in RTBC for weeks on end,
there's very little motivation for me (and clearly many others) to
try to get stuff from CNR to RTBC.
The point of patches and patch reviews are to improve Drupal. That
only happens once a patch *lands*. So long as one person is the
bottleneck for patches landing, there's no point in shaming,
moralizing, or otherwise cajoling people to review more patches.
Given a single maintainer, I think the core development workflow
should make more use of the patch spotlight and be something like:
- Dries says the 1-5 patches he cares about and is willing to follow
and comment on at any given time.
- People who want to help core work on those patches until they're
Just about anything else is a giant waste of time it seems.
More information about the development