/hg/icedtea-web: Outdated documentation replaced by documentatio...

Jiri Vanek jvanek at redhat.com
Tue Sep 9 14:40:08 UTC 2014

On 09/09/2014 04:11 PM, Jacob Wisor wrote:
> On 09/09/2014 04:03 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>>>> +executable, regardless of the license terms of these independent
>>>> +modules, and to copy and distribute the resulting executable under
>>> So this is how it works now? We do not need consensus anymore? I am a bit
>>> confused here.
>>> Jacob
>> Both Andrew and Jie had they careful ok(with nits I have fixed). One ok is ok to
>> go, and one nope is ok to stop. So no confusion should be here.
> Okay, I understand. But, what is the time frame for review then, or is it first come first serve
> (FIFO)?
Not exactly fifo. Anybody can review anything, even if it is already reviewed. Also anybody can stop 
anything - even if it was pushed.
If more reviewers get involved, then it is necessary to wait for all of them. See the last paragraph.

If there are concerns about already pushed stuff, then anybody can comment it after, and the author 
should fix it. If the concerns are to strong, patch can be reverted.

On opposite - to much reviewers{however intentions are good},  the authors death.[1] So if somebody 
already reviewed something, it is (probably) good idea to stay away, and only scream on crucial 
things. If there is need to wait for more then two review "ok",  then it can lead to .



[1] ... http://cs.wiktionary.org/wiki/Mnoho_ps%C5%AF_zaj%C3%ADcova_smrt ....  angličtina: Too many 
cooks spoil the broth., too many chiefs and not enough Indians

More information about the distro-pkg-dev mailing list