chukwa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jiaqi Tan <tanji...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Applying commit-then-review
Date Tue, 21 Sep 2010 05:12:29 GMT
I second the RTC model for Chukwa; I think the group of committers is
small enough that RTC will still be quite agile.

Jiaqi

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Jerome Boulon <jboulon@netflix.com> wrote:
> I would like to keep the review-then-commit (RTC) pattern.
> This should theoretically prevent anyone from adding non-tested/non-valid code and since
we have to pass the review step the code should be better.
> Also, theoretically  this should gave a trunk that is almost always good.
> /Jerome.
>
>
> On 9/13/10 12:58 PM, "Bernd Fondermann" <bernd.fondermann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> If I understand correctly, Chukwa is following the review-then-commit
> (RTC) pattern: Before every commit, a patch gets posted to a JIRA and
> only on positive feedback it is committed.
> As far as I can see, this is inherited from Hadoop's policies.
> However, most projects at the ASF apply commit-then-review (CTR). CTR
> has the advantage of being more agile, requiring less work (creating
> issue, patch file, attaching it, waiting for feedback etc.) while
> providing full oversight:
> Every commit is reviewed by other committers after it happened, can be
> discussed, reverted, improved etc. as a 'work in progress'.
> It is best practice in CTR-mode to selectively use RTC, e.g. for big
> patches or for potentially delicate commits.
>
> I think Chukwa would profit from changing to CTR, so I'd like to know
> what you think about it.
>
> Thanks,
>
>   Bernd
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message