[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Code Review Process

[Geoffrey Martin-Noble via cfe-dev]

On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 2:32 PM David Blaikie via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> I think the term "ad-hoc" was applied to the process, not the outcome. I
> don't think Reid's suggesting we'd end up with a "multiple different
> kinds of review process", but that we don't have a good formal process for
> decision making, so folks are experimenting with various ways to help move
> big, difficult decisions forward in a more reliable way.
>
There is actually a formal LLVM decision making process:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www/blob/master/proposals/LP0001-LLVMDecisionMaking.md.
It has only been used a few times before, but may be worth using here.

On Thu, 7 Oct 2021 at 22:31, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not sure I'd say it's been working well - it took a lot of time, a lot
> of volunteers and dragging some folks along in the end anyway. I think
> there's a lot of merit in having a more structured (honestly: faster)
> decision making process. We often end up in choice/analysis paralysis -
> where it's easier to object than to address objections, which is tiring for
> those trying to make change & slows down things quite a bit.
>
I think this is pretty key, especially with infrastructure work.
Infrastructure tends to be neglected because it's rarely the core of the
project. And since it affects developer workflows, it tends to be
contentious. It is very easy for people to come up with objections or muddy
things enough that no progress is made at all.

On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 1:46 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Another side-point: whilst the IWG may consist of people who care about
> LLVM, there are far more people who care as much, but who just don't have
> the time to participate in such a group.
>
I would push back pretty strongly against this. Obviously the entire
community should be able to voice its opinions, but at some point some
people are the ones who are actually implementing things. It doesn't matter
if the community comes to some consensus if no one is actually willing to
build that thing. Again, and especially with infrastructure, it is very
easy for people to complain about any solution, but much more effort to
actually contribute to the one they prefer.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20211007/d6ffcf4b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3992 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20211007/d6ffcf4b/attachment-0001.bin>