aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Farner <wfar...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Commits without reviews
Date Wed, 30 Dec 2015 04:48:00 GMT
Sorry for the jargon - "to be reviewed".  It's a commit that is reviewed
offline, with the expectation that the committer will address any comments
in a follow-up patch.

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I am sorry, but what is TBR?
>
> - Henry
>
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 8:00 PM, John Sirois <john@conductant.com> wrote:
> > I'm +1 to skipping reviews for those portions of the codebase that are
> hard
> > to test except via trail and error.
> >
> > I'm -0 to using TBR in an OSS project.  In my mind TBR is for emregencies
> > of which there should be none in an OSS infra project; these should only
> be
> > in the leaves that use the OSS projects where the right answer should
> > generally be one either roll back or fork/patch/custom private release
> for
> > the emergency.
> > My experience is biased by the 1 spat of TBR I personally did as
> encouraged
> > by the core pants committers on the pants project.  This was a series of
> > ~20 TBR reviews of experimental code in an exp/ dir unused by the
> mainline
> > code, but committed to master.  The hope was that these reviews would be
> > looked at and they have not been ~3 months down the road.
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> -Jake
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > All,
> >> >
> >> > Over the past few days, i have made several commits to the repository
> >> > without code review.  Our convention has historically been to perform
> a
> >> > code review for any change, however small.  Please see below for some
> >> > rationale, but i would like to propose that we allow committers to
> >> exercise
> >> > judgement on skipping code reviews for changes unrelated to build or
> test
> >> > of the main project (e.g. scheduler, executor, client, packaging).
> What
> >> do
> >> > you all think?
> >> >
> >> > As an example, i think the code review process is too much overhead
> for
> >> > commits like the ones below.  With these commits i was playing
> >> whack-a-mole
> >> > to get alignment between markdown rendering on
> github.com/apache/aurora
> >> > and
> >> > aurora.apache.org.  Skipping code review allowed me to fix things in
> a
> >> > much
> >> > shorter timeframe.
> >> >
> >> > commit 0d9fe18
> >> > Author: Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org>
> >> > Date:   Wed Dec 23 08:31:27 2015 -0800
> >> >
> >> >     Fix string interpolation for release email.
> >> >
> >> > commit df5200b
> >> > Author: Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org>
> >> > Date:   Mon Dec 21 14:19:48 2015 -0800
> >> >
> >> >     Fix formatting and work around anchor link issues in
> installing.md
> >> >
> >> > commit 21c605e
> >> > Author: Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org>
> >> > Date:   Mon Dec 21 14:11:10 2015 -0800
> >> >
> >> >     Fix anchor links in installing.md.
> >> >
> >> > commit 9326fa6
> >> > Author: Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org>
> >> > Date:   Mon Dec 21 12:21:37 2015 -0800
> >> >
> >> >     Link to install guide from docs/README.md
> >> >
> >> > commit f8e59a4
> >> > Author: Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org>
> >> > Date:   Mon Dec 21 12:12:56 2015 -0800
> >> >
> >> >     Fix formatting issues in installing doc.
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > John Sirois
> > 303-512-3301
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message