PR usage by people with commit access

[Joshua Root]

On 2016-11-5 06:14 , Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Sterling Smith <smithsp at fusion.gat.com> wrote:
>> In the past, I have seen responses to svn changelogs directed to the committer and copied to the dev list,
>
> I expect that to continue to be the case.
>
>> so apparently port maintainers who are committers are not always the best reviewers.  How many times has there been a post-svn-commit debate about whether something warranted a revision bump?  I would recommend that any change that changes the build more than a version and checksum change warrants a pull request.  If no one acts to review it within the timeliness dictated of the committer, then they still have the prerogative and authority to commit the changes when they want.
>
> -1 from me.
>
> I'm not sure what problem this actually would solve, and it would be more work for committers.
>
> [if we had lots of people capable and willing to do review every change, then I could see it being helpful - but we don't have that]

I can see PRs being helpful in the case where a committer has a change 
to someone else's port ready to go and they just want to run it by the 
maintainer. In that situation it's quicker and easier than the alternatives.

But in general, yeah, not enough hours in the day.

- Josh