harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Accept HARMONY-57 : Contribution of unit test code for a number of components
Date Fri, 03 Mar 2006 23:10:18 GMT
Leo Simons wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 09:50:02AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>>> can I vote a "blank statement +1" that you can use to move code into SVN?
>> I think that if you would like to make a +1 blanket statement, then 
>> we'll count that in the future.
> In my mind, in terms of "people that have reviewed what is going on and
> what is going into SVN and that the paperwork is ok", it doesn't count.
> No statement in that case is better.
>>> I mean, if we have the paperwork, let's move the code in, whether or not 
>>> we end up releasing it will require another vote anyway.
>> However, for awareness, oversight and participation, I think we still 
>> should be voting code in.
> +1. "I trust Geir got it right" is bad since it creates a dependency on Geir
> and moreover doesn't scale well (and scaling, we need...). However, changing
> to a commit-then-review mode might help, and might scale better.

That's my point. "review then commit" is silly, it doesn't work.

we are voting to put stuff in svn, not to get it out as rubberstamped. 
if we were to vote about anything that goes in SVN, we wouldn't be able 
to do crap.

I don't know about you, but I have no time to check for all those big 
chunks of code that get inside the repo... the 'input' filter is only 
legal and/or political, not technical, and I have no real oversight on 
what Geir does when he says "paperwork is in". But then again, if we had 
to challenge in court everyone of Geir's assertions, we would never do 

Therefore my umbrella +1 to get stuff in SVN if the person doing the 
paperwork it's a mentor of this project and says it's cool.

Getting stuff out is a different matter entirely.


View raw message