[SciPy-dev] The future of SciPy and its development infrastructure
Thu Feb 26 11:25:44 CST 2009
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:58, Travis E. Oliphant
> Pauli Virtanen wrote:
>> Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:18:37 -0600, Travis E. Oliphant wrote:
>>> 3) There are pieces of SciPy that need work (interpolate stands out most
>>> in my mind right now). I have changes to the interpolate code that I
>>> have not yet committed because I was waiting for the release of 0.7 but
>>> I really want to commit. Who is interested in reviewing this? I'm
>>> happy to work with additional eyes, but my current workflow is "commit
>>> code I think is working along with some tests and docstrings", and then
>>> let review/improve happen on the trunk.
>> The codereview.appspot.com tool is very fast to use, eg. via the
>> tool. So I'd suggest to just uploading the patches there even before
>> commit; it can't do any harm.
> The harm is the effort to do it. Interacting with a web-page is
> slower than svn commit.
That's why there are CLI tools to submit the review.
> This extra step in the process does make a
> difference when you are time-crunched.
We're usually not.
>> The problem with reviewing code after commit in trunk is that it takes
>> more effort to correct or ask about dubious points.
> I disagree with this statement. Why does it take more effort than
> reviewing code on the trunk? You can do an svn diff to get the code
> changes, and do the review exactly as you could with any other tool.
Because looking at a web page is easier, I've found. The communicating
that happens afterwards is also easier.
Please, *try* it for a month. I believe that you are speaking from ignorance.
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
More information about the Scipy-dev