@adamchainz @carlton @lilyf sure, more reviews don't hurt. But I'd like to point out that this is basically a reimplementation of the stuff in the go stdlib, so not exactly new territory.

@carlton looks like it, so how do we get it in ;)

@encbladexp hast böse middlewares dazwischen? Das könnte quic schwerer machen. Ob golang oder Python bei 2k Verbindungen die quasi nix tun ist vermutlich egal

@carlton agreed on the UI issues itself, but I was mostly referring to the concept of code reviews itself. When contributing to Qt I had to get familiar with Gerrit and the experience there is way better. Ie you see the comments on individual patchsets and can easily follow the discussion. Something that is literally impossible for a GitHub PR as soon as it gets a bit longer and comments refer to code that no longer exists in that form

@carlton haha, I knew someone would say it. I don't have strong feelings, but I wonder what our options are. Personally I think GitHub style code review is also somewhat suboptimal for anything "large" but one could argue that this is "our" problem because such large PRs shouldn't exist. So if we were to change to something else we should look for "better" and not just a GitHub replacement.

@carlton yeah that resonates with my experience as well 🤗

@carlton are you going all in for everything or mainly for highly dynamic layouts/components?