From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14394 invoked by alias); 14 Sep 2007 20:17:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 14386 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Sep 2007 20:17:52 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com (HELO e36.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.154) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:17:46 +0000 Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e36.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l8EKHO8f015316 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 16:17:24 -0400 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l8EKHOA2484576 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:17:24 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l8EKHOLY008912 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:17:24 -0600 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (wecm-9-67-0-27.wecm.ibm.com [9.67.0.27]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l8EKHMLs008820; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:17:23 -0600 Message-ID: <46EAEC2B.7050105@us.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:27:00 -0000 From: Vara Prasad User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Keniston CC: systemTAP Subject: Re: bug-fix reviews [was: Bug 4930] References: <46E9FE4F.7060008@oracle.com> <46EAA3EB.3090909@us.ibm.com> <1189796924.3774.29.camel@dyn9047018096.beaverton.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1189796924.3774.29.camel@dyn9047018096.beaverton.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-q3/txt/msg00597.txt.bz2 Jim Keniston wrote: >On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 08:08 -0700, Vara Prasad wrote: > > >>Wenji Huang wrote: >> >> >> >>>Hi all, >>> >>> Regarding to bug 4930, I created patches for it >>>(http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4930). >>> Please kindly review it. If no objection, I will commit it. >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Wenji >>> >>> >>Can we follow/change our review process to that of kernel where patch is >>posted inline in the mailing list for review instead of posting/placing >>elsewhere? I am hoping having patches readily available in the mail >>client improves our review process and avoids costly mistakes. >> >>bye, >>Vara Prasad >> >> > >It's definitely appropriate to attach the patch to the bugzilla. To get >a review, you either need to ensure that appropriate reviewers are on >the bugzilla's cc list, or explicitly request a review, as Wenji has >done. I don't find it inconvenient to follow a couple of links to get >at the patch. > >I prefer to see review accomplished via the bugzilla mechanism, so that >the thread is captured in the bugzilla. Of course, this typically >restricts visibility of the review thread to the bug owner and the >bugzilla's cc list. Pro: Uninterested people aren't bothered with >extraneous emails. Con: (a) A relevant reviewer may be excluded from >the cc list. (b) If the review thread forks off a thread that warrants >wider participation, somebody has to take the trouble to move that >thread out of the bugzilla. > >Jim > > > Well, review comments thread can be accomplished via mailing list as well hence i don't see any advantage of doing it in the bugzilla. There are lot more people looking at the mailing list then just bugs and excluding them from the review to me is a big disadvantage. Coming to providing a link to bugzilla and asking for review still has the draw back of traversing the link. I think following the common open source methodology of reviewing the patches in the mailing list gives us better chance of good reviews and we don't have to ask developers to learn a new process. bye, Vara Prasad