"be consistent" | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Perhaps one of the ground rules is that "review" should not address "style", which is usually quite subjective. Rather, "review" should encompass issues of a) correctness b) robustness c) elegance d) performance e) portability f) re-usability g) security h) applicability. And maybe some other stuff I can't think of right now.
As for who should be able to review, perhaps code review should be limited to monks who have attained a certain XP level (although that opens a whole new vista on the whole "XP whoring" issue), or perhaps a panel appointed (at first) by Vroom and then later the board can add members to itself as it sees fit. Hopefully, having the correct people on the panel, combined with a good , would limit flmaing and encourage useful discourse.
In reply to Re: Re: Code review
by husker
|
|