Re: Half-baked unused features.

[Carl Sorensen]

On 8/15/10 8:15 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> <david>
>> we don't *have* a "full review process" in any meaningful sense of the
>> term.  Especially not for "cleaning up" things.
>> 
>> As evidence, consider:
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/1724041/show
>> 
>> - big initial patch
>> - lots of comments about splitting up the patch into smaller,
>> easily-understood portions
>> - contributor (an unknown person, BTW) does what we ask
>> - NOBODY bloody looks at it.  The reworked patch has been rotting away
>> for almost 2 months.
>> 
>> That's a huge black mark against our development process.
>> </david>
> 
> Not the process per se, but try doing this on Rietveld.  Those are lots
> of changes in small files.  For every single change, you need to tell
> the web interface to show you the file difference.  You look at it, it
> looks ok.  Now you need to navigate back to the list of changed files,
> remember which file you just looked at, select the next file in the
> list, navigate to its change overview.

Or you can just use j to go to the next file on the list or k to go to the
previous file on the list (or click on those respective links).

I never go back to the main issue page during a review.

Thanks,

Carl