Changes between Version 25 and Version 26 of PatchReviewProcess

Timestamp:

2013-09-20T19:53:12Z (11 years ago)

Author:

zooko

Comment:

proposed experimental process: Suspicious Code Review

PatchReviewProcess

@@ -41 +41 @@
 4. Write comments about specific parts of the code. This demonstrates that you actually read it carefully enough to understand and care about parts of it, and it makes the author feel good that someone is talking about what they wrote.
 
+= Experiment: Suspicious Patch Review =
+
+Maybe it would be fun to imagine, while you're reviewing a patch, that the author has been compelled to slip a Trojan into the patch by evil adversaries, and it is your job to notice it! That's why you are motivated to request that the author rewrite or explain any confusing parts, because any parts of the patch that confuse the code-reviewer are parts where a Trojan could slip through. Of course, well-written Trojans are indistinguishable from normal old innocent bugs, so if you find a bug this way, give the author the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was an honest mistake.
+
 == Using trac and github ==