hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com>
Subject DISCUSSION: Patch commit criteria.
Date Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:04:59 GMT
There were discussions on several jiras and threads recently about how RTC
actually works in Hadoop.
My opinion has always been that for a patch to be committed it needs an
approval  (+1) of at least one committer other than the author and no -1s.
The Bylaws seem to be stating just that:
"Consensus approval of active committers, but with a minimum of one +1."
See the full version under Actions / Code Change
<http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html#Decision+Making>

Turned out people have different readings of that part of Bylaws, and
different opinions on how RTC should work in different cases. Some of the
questions that were raised include:
 - Should we clarify the Code Change decision making clause in Bylaws?
 - Should there be a relaxed criteria for "trivial" changes?
 - Can a patch be committed if approved only by a non committer?
 - Can a patch be committed based on self-review by a committer?
 - What is the point for a non-committer to review the patch?
Creating this thread to discuss these (and other that I sure missed) issues
and to combine multiple discussions into one.

My personal opinion we should just stick to the tradition. Good or bad, it
worked for this community so far.
I think most of the discrepancies arise from the fact that reviewers are
hard to find. May be this should be the focus of improvements rather than
the RTC rules.

Thanks,
--Konst

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message