Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-bigtop-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bigtop-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4E0CA801C for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 17:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 37808 invoked by uid 500); 8 Aug 2011 17:07:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-bigtop-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 37769 invoked by uid 500); 8 Aug 2011 17:07:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact bigtop-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: bigtop-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list bigtop-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 37761 invoked by uid 99); 8 Aug 2011 17:07:25 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:07:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of andrew.bayer@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.175] (HELO mail-vx0-f175.google.com) (209.85.220.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:07:18 +0000 Received: by vxj14 with SMTP id 14so3625007vxj.6 for ; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 10:06:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=Ek9mmq71iL4gejIkMCythMwdtfUSNTSBjEwuo5l4epM=; b=ePQPvVEVM9XDQujJAFbbI3gFMQEraZjfStqvkepsGRRwThISUAx2WETFlwbEI4RqyH xUzfynRWGEHESeeOc173L8iwVgkqy1VsozE2vwzzXvKcLoVRr/G185wDVnmpzHGIDRkP /MToEmLUSndmykeMQW3t4fZue7HkhcErrP71I= Received: by 10.52.115.164 with SMTP id jp4mr5942480vdb.362.1312823217153; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 10:06:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.187.197 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 10:06:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Andrew Bayer Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 10:06:36 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review To: bigtop-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec548a06f82e4e104aa0179d2 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --bcaec548a06f82e4e104aa0179d2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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. --bcaec548a06f82e4e104aa0179d2--