httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Lazy Consensus for 2.4.x backports
Date Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:03:38 GMT
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:

> Pulling this out as a proposal:
>
> I propose that we track all backports in 2.4 STATUS as we currently
> do. Each backport is time-tagged and we operate under a lazy
> consensus. Assuming no -1 votes within 96 hours, the backport
> can be applied to 2.4.x. If the backport gets 3 +1 votes sooner
> than that, then it can be applied asap...
>
> As with ALL patches, any commit can be reverted for good
> technical (or legal) reasons.
>
> [ ] +1: Agree with this proposal (to start post 2.4.5 release)
> [ ] -1: Disagree with this proposal (and why)
>
>
-1

The current process

* works well/appropriately IMO; to me that means pretty good stream of
fixes to 2.4.x without too high a risk of regressions
* has demonstrably resulted in a reasonably small number of regressions so
far across 2.4.x and earlier releases (definitely not zero regressions, but
pretty darn low).

I think that it is a safe assumption that there will be code changes in
stable releases that have had less review if we make this change.  Largely
regression-free stable releases are of crucial importance for
infrastructure software like httpd, more so than getting another
window-size worth of fixes into the release, especially if they've been
looked at less than the others.

If I count right, 80% or more of the fixes potentially in 2.4.next are
already there (I didn't count mod_lua.)  That doesn't seem so bad.
-- 
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
http://emptyhammock.com/

Mime
View raw message