incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthew Hartmann <>
Subject Re: Maintainer/committer model for CloudStack
Date Wed, 16 May 2012 12:40:55 GMT
I believe the worst person to perform quality assurance on code is the 
person who wrote the code. It would be best to have someone else who 
didn't write the code to test and make sure the application and new code 
are functional because they are going to be approaching it with fresh eyes.

Matthew Hartmann
/Systems Administrator  |  V: 812.378.4100 x 850   |  E:


On 5/16/2012 12:38 AM, Alex Huang wrote:
>> Contributors - people who contribute in one way or another to the project
>> Committers - people who have commit access to the project's repo(s)
>> Maintainers - volunteers from the pool of committers who have stepped
>> forward to shepherd a single module. This is not a position of authority - but
>> rather one of responsibility - to ensure coding standards are met, that
>> accepted patches don't break things, etc.
> So going into that, this is one area where I have difference opinion on maintainer's
> In the write-up, it says "Review, and potentially acceptance, of code changes from the
community. The maintainer is responsible for testing that new contributions work and do not
break the application, and that the code changes are of high quality."
> I think the maintainer should be responsible for making sure the process from feature
design, code design, code review, to unit testing and integration testing have been followed
but I find that "testing that new contributions work" to be challenging for a maintainer.
 I think the committers need to prove as part of their patch that it doesn't break things.
 Maintainers can go back and say "Well, you haven't proved this or that" and can give suggestions
on how to prove it.
> What do others think?
> --Alex

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