Review policy changes #790
Conversation
|
rustbot has assigned @workingjubilee. Use |
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
| - If the change is intended for another team, roll a reviewer from the relevant | ||
| team. | ||
| team (with `r? @rust-lang/<team-name>`) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: probably not this form, because if you are a project member who has ping permissions it will ping the entire team. This should probably still use the triagebot adhoc_groups names I think.
| complicated. It is expected from contributors to split their work as much as | ||
| (reasonably) possible. Smaller, ideally self-contained bites make a review | ||
| feasable. In general, before submitting large impact changes, it is expected the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: slightly adjust the wording here, maybe something like "a patch series of more digestible PRs which are individually more logically self-contained".
My thinking here is that micro PRs for the sake of small PRs isn't always good either. Could also recommend PR author discuss how to split the large change with the team as well. Sometimes it might take different reviewers who are specialized/experts in different areas to review a subset of individual PRs in the patch series.
Co-authored-by: 许杰友 Jieyou Xu (Joe) <[email protected]>
Follow-up to #553 for a second round of comments/fixes/improvements.
I applied a few minor cosmetic changes and some wording (feel free to improve how it flows)