Hi all, During the work on the containers library, I felt that it's too difficult to contribute non-functional changes to the libraries managed by the libraries list. If you look at repos of libraries managed by individuals, rather than the libraries list, you see a smattering of small changes that improve: the internal structure, the docs, the tests, and (if you're lucky) the benchmarks of the library. I'd like to see (and make) more non-functional changes to the core libraries, but currently I feel that the overhead of creating a ticket, writing an email, etc., is too large; what should be a 5-minute change stretches to over two weeks. I argue that's the reason we don't see many small, but important, changes to the core libraries. Proposal: Non-functional changes should be allowed without review by the libraries list. Such changes can be commited directly, if the commiter has access to the repo, or attached to a "please merge" ticket on the bug tracker. Only changes that don't affect the API or performance (in non-trivial ways) should be allowed in without a review. Examples of patches that shouldn't require review: addition of tests/benchmarks, smaller documentation improvements, internal reorganization, updates due to compiler changes, etc. It's possible that once a commit that should have been reviewed gets commited. I suggest we adopt an "ask for forgiveness, not for permission" policy in these cases. We can always roll back changes. N.B. If someone (e.g. Ian) commits patches of this nature on someone else's behalf, that person should not be held responsible if the patches are rolled back later. Comments welcome! Cheers, Johan