https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmittingPatches Read the section under "14) Using Reported-by:, Tested-by:, Reviewed-by: and Suggested-by:". That might be helpful in our process too? Warren On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: > >> I'd like to make a small request - when submitting large, complex pieces >> of work for review, please either submit it as one giant squashed change, >> or be an absolute fascist about keeping commits logically clean and >> separated. >> > > I'll try harder to be a fascist (it doesn't come naturally to me). HUGE > thanks for taking the time to review the fee changes in detail. > > RE: using Review Board: > > I'm all for using better tools, if they will actually get used. If a > potential reviewer has to sign up to create a Review Board account or learn > Yet Another Tool, then I think it would be counter-productive: we'd just > make the pool of reviewers even smaller than it already is. > > Are there good examples of other open source software projects > successfully incentivizing review that we can copy? > > For example, I'm wondering if maybe for the 0.9 release and onwards the > "Thank you" section should thank only people who have significantly helped > test or review other people's code. > > -- > -- > Gavin Andresen > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > October Webinars: Code for Performance > Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. > Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most > from > the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134791&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > >