Mailing-List: contact notifications-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: jira@apache.org
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 01:05:18 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Mike Drob (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: notifications@accumulo.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12676908.1383241739845.12156.1383440718335@arcas>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12676908.1383241739845@arcas>
References: <JIRA.12676908.1383241739845@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-1834) ReviewBoard guidelines
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13812234#comment-13812234 ] 

Mike Drob commented on ACCUMULO-1834:
-------------------------------------

bq. To exercise that option, it seems to me that the formal voting should take place on the mailing list, just like other votes, not in ReviewBoard.

Comments on RB do go to the mailing list, however, making them just as good in my understanding.

> ReviewBoard guidelines
> ----------------------
>
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-1834
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1834
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: docs
>            Reporter: Josh Elser
>              Labels: Documentation
>             Fix For: 1.6.0
>
>
> We currently don't have any guidelines on how we should be using reviewboard.
> For example -- How many "ship it"'s are needed to merit consensus? How do we make sure that reviews get applied after consensus is reached?
> Figure out what to do and then write it down.


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)