httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/modules/http http_protocol.c
Date Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:54:50 GMT
Graham Leggett wrote:
> Sander Striker wrote:
>> He meant R-T-C.  Read about it in STATUS, where the current votes are
>> recorded.
> Ok.
> Define "review".

The reviewer reads and/or tests the proposed change and then votes 

> If a patch is posted to v2.1 and receives no comment after a period of 
> time, is that considered "reviewed due to no objections",

I would consider that "not reviewed."  I have seen suggestions for lazy 
consensus, whereby no objection after a period of time means it is okay 
to commit, but that's not what was chosen.

>  or do I now 
> have to post chasing messages to dev to get 3 +1's (ie a whole bunch 
> more work for me)?

your call

Note that it can be helpful to people trying to find time to review to 
see comments in the STATUS file that may affect our priorities (giving a 
simple way to test the fix, making sure that any associated PRs are listed).

Personally I find that the more time I spend to review other people's 
patches, the more effort those people make to review mine.  Whether this 
is pure quid pro quo or whether busy people are inspired to help out a 
little more when they see other busy people doing the same is subject to 
debate :)

> Are bugfixes subject to R-T-C?


> The description of this issue in STATUS is vague to say the least.

The only thing to mention would be which things don't need to be 
reviewed prior to commit.

View raw message