Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B44510067 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 01:27:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 18445 invoked by uid 500); 19 Dec 2013 01:27:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 18385 invoked by uid 500); 19 Dec 2013 01:27:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 18377 invoked by uid 99); 19 Dec 2013 01:27:27 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 01:27:27 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at spf.trusted-forwarder.org) Received: from [209.85.128.171] (HELO mail-ve0-f171.google.com) (209.85.128.171) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 01:27:23 +0000 Received: by mail-ve0-f171.google.com with SMTP id pa12so277590veb.2 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:27:02 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=pvjFWI933VlCR12viN5M7abmtWfln+eGtW5k5snMbvs=; b=QArSshlRAe9k6V4vUNOc5NBtKVr8Ur4eYP7UBhXgCnLTNyooxdGLSIsjCcdbqNxcNI /thogvaheFvFOsFHXLocP2hvIcEt8ggPSWWPNSojVgaLmUSXIassQI2Jtd96L628f2Bm eX5DM6lfd705n+MNZ4Hy1wXkSHy1U7NrFLuTaayqJ9vEsUlGQ35jtCulSB2NVWKOan0I ClapHD3IW8bk98ueoDK/A0SWHrNK97th8fx6IjIqVevV7mQ7gc3SJ4PI4vzIiRf3a9mI RAdapicQTXQ3LXQ2/nx2XjVxtV3iRwp29mPdHW5XYcFIBvZRwfdjZoDBkgdfRy2WyuFh Tbkw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkR997gI5SNLN94ujncgFJJzPWet3ec952Lb1guLRBzFxWlNec9dfyR2iqGhJw2Um+SDeys X-Received: by 10.52.190.131 with SMTP id gq3mr4077041vdc.18.1387416422628; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:27:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.24.49 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:26:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 20:26:42 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: HBASE-7088 ready to commit ;) To: dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011846ee06d97b04edd90f8b X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --089e011846ee06d97b04edd90f8b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My point is that it forces more eyes to look at what is done and might allow (force) more discussions? On your side Andrew, regarding 0.98, can you please commit on not taking any vacations for the next 12 months please? ;) 2013/12/18 Andrew Purtell > I don't see how more votes will increase the quality of design. Your > participation in the community and providing of feedback will increase th= e > quality of design, and code too if you volunteer time to do code review o= n > JIRAs and reviews.apache.org. > > I can understand the motivation of adding friction. We already provide > substantial friction as part of the normal Apache process of having Relea= se > Managers. If LarsH or Stack go away for a month, we probably won't have > commits to 0.94 or 0.96 during that time. I'm not convinced we need more > friction than this so I'm not in favor of the policy as it is currently > written in the online manual. That said, I certainly have an open mind > about this subject. Perhaps there is some evidence that more friction is > warranted? > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > Honestly I'm pretty fine with the policy described at > > http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#decisions > > > > "Patches that fit within the scope of a single Apache HBase component > > require, at least, a +1 by one of the component's owners before commit. > If > > owners are absent -- busy or otherwise -- two +1s by non-owners will > > suffice. " that mean usually one +1 is enough, or sometime 2x +1. > > > > But I will not complain if I need just one +1 for this patch ;) > > > > I think having 2x +1 will increase the quality of the code/design. > > > > > > > > 2013/12/18 Andrew Purtell > > > > > Also let me clarify something: A while back we discussed the Hadoop > > policy > > > of requiring 3 +1s for a branch merge. That sounds reasonable to me. = I > > > don't see this in the current online manual text. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Andrew Purtell > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Eh, that must have been discussed when I wasn't there or on the pho= ne > > and > > > > unable to hear clearly. I'm not in favor of that policy as stated. > > > > Ownership isn't working out as far as I can see. Owners are not > around > > > > enough. In fact I would say many people are relatively absent from > the > > > > community for long stretches of time. That's fine, this is a > volunteer > > > > society. We can't gate on an owner +1. I am not in favor of requiri= ng > > > more > > > > than one +1 except for the obvious case where a committer should no= t > +1 > > > and > > > > commit their own work. I am in favor of continuing our informal > policy > > of > > > > CTR for trivial changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Stack wrote: > > > > > > > >> Here is what we decided as 'policy' on +1s: > > > >> > > > >> http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#decisions > > > >> > > > >> At our last meetup, we talked of upping the commit friction some t= o > > give > > > >> chance for more review before commit but this suggestion did not > > > progress > > > >> beyond discussion. > > > >> > > > >> St.Ack > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Andrew Purtell < > apurtell@apache.org> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > AFAIK, we just don't want a committer to +1 their own work. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Purtell < > > apurtell@apache.org> > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > No > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > > > >> > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> Don't we need 2 commiters +1 per JIRA? > > > >> > >> Le 2013-12-18 18:23, "Andrew Purtell" = a > > > >> =C3=A9crit : > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > Why is one +1 not good enough for commit? > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Ted Yu < > yuzhihong@gmail.com> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > I gave +1 already > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > Waiting for an extra +1 > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > > > >> > >> > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > It's small and there for a while. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > Thanks. > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > -- > > > >> > >> > Best regards, > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > - Andy > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back= . > - > > > Piet > > > >> > Hein > > > >> > >> > (via Tom White) > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- > > > >> > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > - Andy > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - > > Piet > > > >> Hein > > > >> > > (via Tom White) > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > >> > - Andy > > > >> > > > > >> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - > Piet > > > Hein > > > >> > (via Tom White) > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > - Andy > > > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > > Hein > > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > > > > - Andy > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) > --089e011846ee06d97b04edd90f8b--