<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:31, Daniel Stutzbach <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:daniel@stutzbachenterprises.com">daniel@stutzbachenterprises.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 9:52 AM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:exarkun@twistedmatrix.com" target="_blank">exarkun@twistedmatrix.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div><div class="im">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div></div><div>Of course, this is only true if the core developers *do* submit to the same rules. Is anyone proposing that current core committers have all their work reviewed before it is accepted?</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div></div><div><br></div><div>I think most would welcome (or at least tolerate ;) ) additional review of their code.</div><div><br></div><div>The hard part is encouraging contributors to find the time and motivation to thoroughly review code that they aren't personally interested in (and perhaps not even familiar with).</div>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">
<br>-- <br>Daniel Stutzbach, Ph.D.<br>
President, <a href="http://stutzbachenterprises.com/" target="_blank">Stutzbach Enterprises, LLC</a></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I definitely welcome additional, or in some cases, *any* review. Looking for reviews of Windows features/bugs sometimes equates to looking in a ghost town, but I have the self-inflicted problem of using Windows in the first place ;)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Anyways, a big +1 to expanding review, especially incorporating something like Rietveld. Although I'm replying out of order, Barry's big response lays out a lot of good ideas that I think we can use.</div>
</div>