[llvm-dev] RFC: Code Review Process

Renato Golin via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Oct 5 09:47:53 PDT 2021

On Tue, 5 Oct 2021 at 17:06, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> - Any other information that you think will help the Board of Directors
> make the best decision.

- Foundation Board will have 30 days to make a final decision about using
> GitHub Pull Requests and then communicate a migration plan to the community.

Hi Tom,

Please help me here, I think I'm severely misunderstanding what this

I'm reading it that the "Board of Directors" will make a decision and
communicate to the community, apparently through some undisclosed internal

For example:
 * What about people that are on holidays during the 30 days comment period?
 * What if the points are not made clear after 30 days?
 * How do we know the IWG will correctly summarise the comments to the
 * How does the board guarantee it will take all facts in consideration
without bias?
 * What kind of recourse would the community have if the decision alienates
a large part of the developers?

Please understand that I'm not assuming malice *at all*. We're all humans,
and in the effort to make some change happen we quite often let unconscious
bias be the merits of our decisions.

For context...

Since its inception[1], the foundation has always steered away from
technical decisions, always referring to the llvm-dev list for those.
Previous long running contentious issues (Github, monorepo, CoC) were all
decided by the community, in the llvm-dev list, and executed by the

Recent discussions about the mailing list, irc, discord, discourse have
emphasised that, even with an infrastructure working group, the views of
the community are still too hard to predict and make it work for the
majority. Neither the board of directors, nor the IWG are wide and diverse
enough to make decisions that take most people's views into consideration.
That is why we still rely on the dev list for large technical discussions
and decisions.

Code review and bug tracking are very much technical decisions. Not code
directly, but how we all work. And there are a lot of us. Giving feedback
and having no insight into the decision making process will certainly
divide the community even more, if we're forced to accept whatever outcome.

I can't see how this "solves" the problem of never-ending discussions,
other than further fragmenting the community.


[1] http://blog.llvm.org/2014/04/the-llvm-foundation.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211005/2e925010/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list