db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel John Debrunner <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: New contributors?
Date Thu, 07 Sep 2006 21:15:31 GMT
Jean T. Anderson wrote:

> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> 
>>Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It might be helpful for reviewers to clearly separate "must fix" items
>>
>>>from "nice to have" items in their comments.
>>
>>Sounds great, but what is a must fix? 
> 
> 
> A simple definition could be anything that would prevent it from being
> committed. If a committer doesn't have confidence in a change introduced
> by the patch, then it should *not* be committed.

I don't think that's correct. A patch is committed when at one committer
has the confidence in it, other committer's confidence levels don't
matter. If others believe the patch should not go in, then they can veto.

> To take a concrete example .....
> 
> I won't commit a doc patch unless:
> 
>  - Somebody indicates the changes are technically ok.
>  - The DITA doc build succeeds.

But my (or someone else's) confidence level *might* be lower, if the doc
builds then it's ok, better to get more eyes on it earlier, thus I
commit it, even if you don't have confidence.

> 
> But if something isn't worded quite the way I would personally word it,
> I leave it be -- there's lots of room for style in documentation. Small
> improvements that advance the info further are good and others can take
> it even further.

Right.

Dan.


Mime
View raw message