httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: [POLL] experiment with commit-then-review
Date Wed, 14 Jan 1998 16:24:42 GMT
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> 
> Well, with the votes tallied, it looks like we'll be trying the
> commit-then-review model.
> 
> >    * Ken's [POLL] experiment with commit-then-review
> >      Shall we permit unreviewed commits to the source tree?  (Details
> >      of when it's [in]appropriate to be worked out later.)  Vote, please.
> >       <34B8EEF7.E4BD2126@Golux.Com>
> >       Status: Ken +1, Randy +1, Ben +1, Martin +1, Dean +1, Brian +1,
> >               Jim +1, Rob +1, Paul 0, Ralf +1
> 
> Now for Stage 2, so we can get down to it:
> 
> Is everyone happy with Rob's pithy statement of the guidelines as
> "ideas must be review-then-commit, patches can be commit-then-review"?
> Dean, Jim, and Ralf have +1ed it, and I'm adding my +1 now.
> 
> Obviously, items the submitter isn't sure about or that may fire a
> controversy should probably go through review first.  What about
> enhancements?  I think the discussion resulted in their being okey
> under the c-t-r method.
> 
> What about enhancements during the beta cycle (e.g., right now)?
> There have been some comments aired to the effect that we may have
> feature-frozen too soon.
> 

I think that features, whether new or otherwise, fall under the "ideas"
umbrella. What's important is that people keep the group informed.

-- 
====================================================================
      Jim Jagielski            |       jaguNET Access Services
     jim@jaguNET.com           |       http://www.jaguNET.com/
            "Look at me! I'm wearing a cardboard belt!"

Mime
View raw message