geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <>
Subject Request change to RTC Process
Date Sat, 03 Jun 2006 12:14:45 GMT
I'd like to request a change to the RTC process being used by  
Geronimo (or at least I'm requesting a relaxation of Ken's  
interpretation of the RTC process).

In Ken's announcement of the change to the commit model, he stated  
that a +1 to an RTC request means "I have applied this patch and  
tested it and found it good". Although a relaxation of this  
interpretation has been suggested (or mentioned), to my knowledge  
nothing has actually changed.

In some areas of Geronimo (e.g. devtools), this is a cumbersome and  
difficult task for most committers. The fact that there are not more  
committers interested in these areas of Geronimo is an acknowledged  
issue. However, it's unlikely that current Geronimo committers want  
to be intimately familiar with some of these Geronimo components --  
we've all had our chance to get involved, so far, but have chosen not  

That's a specific problem with the current process. However, I think  
there's a general problem with this interpretation for all areas of  
Geronimo. IMO, this interpretation is not really helping to address  
the fundamental problems/concerns which have prompted the move to  
RTC. IMO, these concerns are that 1) some enhancements are not being  
properly communicated with the Geronimo community, 2) too many  
discussions/debates are occurring on private channels, and 3) some  
people are being intimidated to remain silent on some public  

I'd like to see some specific RTC guidelines created for Geronimo.  
I'm sure other projects must have already crafted similar guidelines.  
So, I'd like to take a look at those, before spending too much time  
on creating guidelines from scratch (I'd also like to shove 1.1. out  
the door...)

In the meantime, I propose the following interpretation of a +1 vote  
to an RTC request:

"I have reviewed (and possibly tested) this patch and found it good.  
I understand the capability which the patch is adding and support the  
direction in which it is taking the Geronimo project"

Comments and suggestions are, of course, welcome...


View raw message