"Torrent" approach for PR reviews (reviewing other PRs helps your own PRs)

[wilzbach]

@andralex proposed a "torrent" approach for reviewing PRs a while ago:

In the BitTorrent protocol,
you only get bits if you offer bits. In the envisioned "review torrent"
protocol, the more PRs you review, the more likely your PR is to get
reviewed. Do you think this could be supported by tooling?

I am not sure yet how tooling could help, but I am putting this here so that it's not forgotten and has a better visibility. Maybe someone else has a good idea?

[MartinNowak]

Do we really want to force people into unmotivated reviews?

[andralex]

@MartinNowak it's a good point. I'd frame it as a kind invitation rather than an imposition. Also, it makes sense to ask people who contributed heavily to a module to review new contributions to the same module (we do some of that already).

[CyberShadow]

Is this still relevant today, now that we have staff reviewing PRs?