On Wed, 2014-03-26 at 14:56 +1100, Nathan Hurst wrote: 
> For fixing code, there should be some sort of timer which says that is
> code is in trunk via the process set up by the project, then it should
> be fixed if found defective by the original developer if found within 2
> or maybe 6 months. Otherwise the code should be considered divorced from
> it's original writer.
> 
> As for policy regarding commit access; we don't do enough to encourage
> code review. Anything to encourage code review would be great, I don't
> even mind if I were downgraded to B level 'code must be reviewed before
> merge' status. Because really, it should be.

I like this.  I'll even put my hand up to do some code reviews.  Can
we just turn code reviews on with our current tooling?

The tooling is there, Launchpad supports this easily, but I think the social aspect is more difficult than the tooling.

Personally I'd prefer to not have "A" or "B" level developers, instead say everyone has to get their code reviewed by someone else. I think that usually makes a significant dent in making someone accountable.

I'd also suggest that if we're making a change like this we move to a tool as being the only one with permission to land, at least at first. Otherwise people will just commit to trunk as they've always done. It seems like after a release would be a good time to make such a change.

Ted