incubator-bigtop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Bayer <andrew.ba...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Date Thu, 11 Aug 2011 21:07:40 GMT
Alright, including James' email to me directly, that's 2 for CTR and 3 for
RTC, so RTC it is!

A.

On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Eli Collins <eli@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Note that in both CTR and RTC there is code review, the decision is
> whether the commit can come first.
>
> My suggestion would be RTC, and if that's moving slowly than move to
> CTR, perhaps have a 1 day timeout. But I don't feel strongly either
> way.
>
> IMO the most important thing is to devote review bandwidth to new
> contributors so we can grow the project.
>
> Thanks,
> Eli
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Bruno Mahé <bmahe@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 08/08/2011 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> >> Hey all -
> >>
> >> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit
> (R-T-C)
> >> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
> >> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
> >> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
> >> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
> >>
> >> A.
> >>
> >
> > I vote +1 for R-T-C.
> > We are far from being behind the number of patches to review, and so far
> > I believe most of them, if not all, have been reviewed within a day.
> > Given these packages are meant to work across a wide variety of
> > distributions, it is very easy to let some bugs slip through and break
> > bigtop for some GNU/Linux distributions. Furthermore we don't have any
> > job set up on jenkins to confirm whether a patch break something or not.
> > And even if we do get some slaves by 0.0.1 or 0.0.2, there will not be
> > as much coverage as there should be.
> > So I would welcome some extra pairs of eyeballs on patches.
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message