db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kathey Marsden <kmarsdende...@sbcglobal.net>
Subject small ,incremental, independent patches
Date Fri, 10 Feb 2006 14:17:38 GMT
There has been a lot of discussion of  the benefit from a 
developer/reviewer/committer/product  perspective of  small,
incremental, independent patches. They are  easy to back out or port if
need be, easier to read and understand.   Developers are less likely to
go far on  tangents that won't be accepted upon review.  All so much
cleaner.    But there is a problem ....

The problem, I think,  is that developers without commit priveleges  get
stuck and bogged down in the process...
1) Waiting for review.
2) Waiting   for a  committers attention to commit . (DERBY-85 for
instance has waited for a very long time I think),
3)  Having  to sync up, rerun tests and resubmit patches for each piece
or after conflicting changes go in.

This situation feeds upon itself. It can be hard to get on the train, so
folks start bringing on extra baggage to avoid an extra trip, adding in
this or that to just get it in.

The solution, I think, is  we need to grease the track for patches
coming in.

1)  Developers need to keep patches as small, incremental, and
independent as possible so that they are easy to review and commit.
2) More non-committers need review and test changes and clearly
indicate  that they feel they are ready to commit.
3) Committers need to be more responsive. We are getting more committers
so this should help.
4) We need reporting on the aging of patches.  (We added that check box
but I am still trying to figure out how to query on it)

I think creating an environment where patches are streamlined is key here.


View raw message