httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject Re: [POLL] experiment with commit-then-review
Date Sun, 18 Jan 1998 06:57:15 GMT
Okey, this issue has been pretty quiet for a few days.
Is anyone unhappy with the conditions for c-t-r as specified
in <>?  (Reproduced
below.)  If no-one has any heartburn with this, can we please
say it's a go and get on with it?

Here's the section from the latest guidelines:

>   We are exploring a new process to help speed development,
>   "commit-then-review". With a commit-then-review process, we
>   trust that committers have a high degree of confidence in their
>   committed patches --- higher than the typical [PATCH] post to the
>   mailing list.
>     * Advance notice (e.g., "I'll be working on flurgl.c") will
>       be given
>     * The CVS tree should be expected to compile at all times;
>       if it is possible that the code will result in some platforms
>       not compiling, notice of this should be announced.
>     * Experimental new features must be discussed before implemented
>     * The committer is responsible for the quality of the third-party
>       code they bring into the code.
>     * Related changes should be posted at once, or very closely
>       together; no half-baked projects in the code.
>     * Any changes:
>          + which affect semantics of arguments to directives
>          + which would have to be implemented differently on other
>            architectures
>          + which significantly add to the runtime size of the program
>       need to be discussed on the mailing list before it gets committed.
>     * A patch must be reversed if the equivalent of a "veto" comes from
>       another developer with commit access.

#ken	P-)}

View raw message