5252
5353 < div id ="entry_block ">
5454 < div class ="entry ">
55- < div class ="date "> Last updated: 11 June 2020</ div >
55+ < div class ="date "> Last updated: 6 October 2020</ div >
5656 < div class ="body ">
5757 < article >
5858 < div class ="title "> On Reviewing, and Helping Those Who Do It</ div >
@@ -74,9 +74,9 @@ <h3 id="the-current-state-of-affairs">The Current State of Affairs</h3>
7474 target ="_blank "> Several hundred pull requests</ a >
7575 are open at any given moment in Bitcoin Core waiting for review
7676 and testing, and the stack continues to grow higher — 280 in
77- November 2019, 380 at the end of April 2020, and now 400 at the
78- start of June, when the number of PRs in the blockers list also
79- reached a
77+ November 2019, 380 at the end of April 2020, and 400 at the
78+ start of June 2020 , when the number of PRs in the blockers list
79+ also reached a
8080 < a href ="http://www.erisian.com.au/bitcoin-core-dev/log-2020-06-04.html#l-329 "
8181 target ="_blank "> record high number</ a > .
8282 </ p >
@@ -132,15 +132,10 @@ <h3 id="current-issues">Current Issues</h3>
132132 Any PR of non-immediate urgency beyond a certain size,
133133 number of commits, or level of complexity is a candidate for
134134 needing to be separated into bite-sized PRs in order to
135- attract reviewers, which multiplies the number of PRs.< br >
136- < br >
137- While small focused PRs are good, and separating large PRs
138- into logical small ones can improve the code, some changes
139- are better done in one go.
140- </ li >
141- < li >
142- Grease (review, merges) sometimes goes to the squeaky
143- wheel. Such is life.
135+ attract reviewers, which multiplies the number of PRs.
136+ While small focused PRs can be good, and separating large
137+ PRs into logical small ones can improve the code, some
138+ changes are better done in one go.
144139 </ li >
145140 < li >
146141 PR authors may be incentivized to open more trivial PRs that
@@ -153,29 +148,29 @@ <h3 id="current-issues">Current Issues</h3>
153148 Things are often abandoned or never quite finished. Some
154149 contributors leave or take long periods of absence from the
155150 project out of frustration. Other people shake it off but
156- feel recurring discouragement. Yes, it's open source. But I
157- think we can improve the situation.
151+ feel recurring discouragement. Yes, it's open source, but I
152+ hope we can improve the situation.
158153 </ li >
159154 < li >
160155 Managing context, relevance, and being kind can make a big
161156 difference. Bitcoin Core code review is a social
162- process. Getting your PRs reviewed without being too
163- annoying (hopefully by helping others and doing consistent
164- review yourself) can be an art.
157+ process. Having PRs reviewed without being too annoying
158+ (hopefully by helping others and doing consistent review
159+ yourself) can be an art.
165160 </ li >
166161 < li >
167162 Nevertheless, the project and its reviewers run a continual
168163 risk of mal-investment — scarce review resources going to
169- poorly done, annoying, insufficiently researched, or
164+ poorly done, annoying, insufficiently researched, or even
170165 dangerous changes, or ones that add technical debt — rather
171166 than catching a regression or vulnerability, fixing issues,
172167 improving test coverage, finishing ongoing work, doing
173168 long-term work, and other priorities.
174169 </ li >
175170 < li >
176- Above all, not enough contributors do consistent review and
177- follow the rule of thumb of 5 to 15 reviews or issues
178- handled per PR opened.
171+ Above all, not enough contributors put the project first, do
172+ consistent review, and follow the rule of thumb of 5 to 15
173+ reviews or issues handled per PR opened.
179174 </ li >
180175 </ ol >
181176 </ p >
@@ -216,17 +211,15 @@ <h3 id="what-to-review">What to Review</h3>
216211 </ li >
217212 < li >
218213 Who: rewarding people who do consistent or outstanding
219- review/issue testing, or who have been kind or patient. Some
220- of the most deserving people haven't seen enough review from
221- me yet, but I've noticed who you are and am working on it.
214+ review/issue testing or who have been kind and selfless.
222215 </ li >
223216 < li >
224217 I also try to avoid reviewing or encouraging these kinds of
225218 PRs:
226219 < ol >
227220 < li >
228- PRs that are poorly done, annoying or unlikely to be
229- merged .
221+ PRs that are poorly done, annoying, appear self-serving,
222+ or that look like commit inflation .
230223 </ li >
231224 < li >
232225 PRs that are unfinished or lacking sufficient research.
@@ -278,8 +271,8 @@ <h3 id="on-reviewing">On Reviewing</h3>
278271 and
279272 < a href ="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc "
280273 target ="_blank "> issues</ a >
281- and choose ones that are somewhat accessible — ideally right at
282- the edge of your current reach — and ramp up gradually to the
274+ and review or test ones that are somewhat accessible — ideally
275+ at the edge of your current reach — and ramp up gradually to the
283276 harder and important
284277 < a href ="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8 "
285278 target ="_blank "> high-priority</ a >
0 commit comments