curator-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jordan Zimmerman <jor...@jordanzimmerman.com>
Subject Re: Jira Issues
Date Mon, 03 Jun 2013 23:32:11 GMT
So, that would imply not acting on patches unless a committer has an interest in it, right?
If a patch poster wants action and isn't getting it he/she would need to post on @dev to find
a champion.

-JZ

On Jun 3, 2013, at 4:14 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:

> Speaking with my Apache Accumulo hat on:
> 
> Contributors will typically attach the patch to the corresponding Jira issue or use review
board [1]
> 
> The patch, ignoring very trivial changes, will typically hang around for a while (probably
due to the time until a committer has a moment to look at it -- I like to think this gives
everyone a chance to look at the changes to give feedback despite us being a CTR [2] project).
A committer who is comfortable with the changes will typically be the "champion" behind it
to ensure it's up to snuff (matches code-style, no compiler warnings, works as intended, has
tests, etc), apply it, and merge it to any other branches as necessary.
> 
> The only time a patch has come up for review/vote for us (as far as I remember) is when
the patch creates a controversial feature or there is strong disagreement on the implementation
of the changes.
> 
> Hope that helps!
> 
> [1] https://reviews.apache.org/dashboard/
> [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#CommitThenReview
> 
> On 06/03/2013 05:08 PM, Jordan Zimmerman wrote:
>> ZooKeeper auto-applies patches. It's nice in that it does a first pass validation
automatically. It's worthwhile, IMO.
>> 
>> On this subject, what should our policy be on patches? Should we vote on every single
one? How do other projects handle it?
>> 
>> -JZ
> 


Mime
View raw message