Improving our review criteria

[Robert Collins]

On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 08:33 +1000, Ian Clatworthy wrote:
> The Bazaar core team has always had a very strong emphasis on quality 
> and that's a great thing. My big complaint though is that our review 
> criteria favours "developer quality" over "user quality". 

I think you're overstating the situation, and underestimating the value
we get by keeping our eyes on the test coverage and code quality.

Low quality code can be very very hard to change and rearrange - and we
have issues with that already.

You make a good case for doing things leaner, but you don't make *any*
case for delivering slower code that is harder to understand and doesn't
have good defect isolation support.

We *have* a discussion around every patch. If *you* want to land a patch
with less tests, convince folk that we won't regret that later.

So far, 99% of the time I've landed stuff with less tests (by saying "I
think it will be ok"), I've been wrong.

-Rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20091113/c19ab53d/attachment.pgp