From: A Large Angry SCM <gitzilla@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 23:20:14 GMT
Subject: Re: help with distributed workflow/signoff
Message-ID: <4C3E462E.9010205@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <loom.20100714T232116-579@post.gmane.org>

On 07/14/2010 05:46 PM, Brock Peabody wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason<avarab<at>  gmail.com>  writes:
>
>> Well, consider that even if you push most patches through, the peer
>> review you get from having a setup similar to Git's own might very
>> well be worth it. Everyone makes mistakes, having a second set of
>> eyeballs to look at your code eliminates a lot of that.
>>
>> That may not be acceptable to your corporate culture, but consider
>> that most big corporations (e.g. Google) do detailed code review
>> before anything gets commited to the master repository.
>
> Yes, that's a good point.  We are trying to improve our code review processes,
> and I think switching to git is going to help with that down the road.  I don't
> want to make the switch to git and a heavier (if better) process at the same
> time, however, as it would decrease the chance of either being accepted.

Have you investigated Gerrit Code Review?