On 06/25/2013 08:26 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> It's not about the reviewers being less. It's a comparison of
> effort. The effort for a casual review simply isn't comparable with the
> effort spent on developing a nontrivial patch.
Remember: "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first
place. ..." (Brian Kernighan)
IMO, the kind of reviews we need are of almost "debug level" difficulty.
(To the point where the reviewer becomes a co-author or even takes over
and submits a completely revamped patch instead.)
I agree that the casual review is several levels below that, so your
point holds. I doubt we need more reviews of that kind, though.
Thus, I'm in the AAB camp. The remaining question being: What's the
criterion for becoming a co-author (and thus getting mentioned in the
release notes)?
If at all, we should honor quality work with a "prize". Maybe a price
for the best reviewer per CF? Maybe even based on votes from the general
public on who's been the best, so reviews gain attention that way...
"Click here to vote for my review." ... Maybe a crazy idea.
Regards
Markus Wanner
