Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Code review

From: Mike Hearn <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 13:36:26 +0200

On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Gavin Andresen <[email-masked]>wrote:

> 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.
>

Thanks, although I wasn't thinking specifically of you. The fee pull is
pretty well laid out. It just reminded me that it seems to be a common
issue I've had over the past year or so, across projects and people.

> 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.
>

Yes, I don't know if github supports any kind of SSO. I will investigate.
As for learning another tool, well, when the current tool kind of sucks I
don't see any way around that one :)

> 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.
>

Perhaps just have a separate section for people who helped review above the
current section? It seems a bit mean not to credit occasional contributors
who fixed bugs or maintained something important but didn't review
complicated changes to the core.