geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jacek Laskowski" <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>
Subject Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?
Date Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:18:05 GMT
On 8/23/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.Coar@golux.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Apache Geronimo has been operating mostly under the
> Review-Then-Commit model for a couple of months now,
> and I think the issues the change was intended to
> highlight have been .. well, highlighted.
>
> How do people feel about the idea of switching back
> to Commit-Then-Review at this point?

I think that until those matters that made it happen are finally
sorted out we should keep this course. I'm not convinced that
highlighting them is what should change the mode to CTR. Also, I'd say
it's only a few days when we've got such a large PMC group to keep the
development pace at a reasonable speed. It's almost as if everybody
with commit karma were on the PMC, so we should *now* be able to
manage the flow. In fact, I don't see a difference between RTC and CTR
when the number of people with binding votes have just increased
significantly.

Just run across a question - let me think out loud. I think it's not
been answered yet. If only PMCers votes are binding and only when a
change gets 3 +1's binding votes (i.e. PMCers) the change may be
checked in, the question is what's the role of the commiters group?
We've got 3 groups: the PMC, the committers and the community and I
don't see how the committers are different from the community even
though they've been armed with something that's I think is unusable?
Wouldn't CTR get rid of the question? Should I ask the question at
all? Should I worry about it? Just thinking out loud hoping I'll get
some helpful responses to clear up the mess I've got in my mind. Too
much to think about before I get asleep.

Jacek

-- 
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.laskowski.net.pl

Mime
View raw message