incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthieu Riou <matthieu.r...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Review-Then-Commit
Date Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:18:54 GMT
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:44, Matthieu Riou <matthieu.riou@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM, ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans <eevans@rackspace.com>
> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +0000, ant elder wrote:
> >> >> so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
> >> >> and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only two people.
> >> >
> >> > I assume you're referring to Jonathan Ellis and myself, and I'm not
> sure
> >> > that's exactly fair. There are only 4 active committers, and of the 4,
> >> > Jonathan and I spend the most time committing patches contributed by
> >> > people who can't, and quite often the "review" was conducted by
> someone
> >> > else who doesn't have commit rights and we are simply acting as a
> proxy.
> >> > This results in a lot of svn commits made by us, for contributions
> that
> >> > are not technically ours.
> >> >
> >> > As a convention, we typically put something like "Patch by $author;
> >> > reviewed by $reviewer for $issue_id" in the change description. I just
> >> > went through the commits scraping out those messages and it looks like
> >> > Jonathan and I account for a little more than 60%, not 99%.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Eric Evans
> >> > eevans@rackspace.com
> >> >
> >>
> >> So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
> >> by others - great - why not make some of those others committers?
> >>
> >>
> > That's pretty much what they're doing about right now but as you know, it
> > takes some time to establish a good patch history. I really don't thin
> > Cassandra should be accused of being bad at attracting and voting in new
> > committers. Given how they started they're definitely better at it than
> most
> > podlings.
>
> Easy there... nobody is accusing anybody of anything.
>
>
Ah, sorry if that came across too strongly, I didn't mean it that way. I
just meant that I haven't seen a problem in the way Cassandra was attracting
committers. So that was definitely discussion as well on my side :)

Matthieu


> You asked a question, and people have answered. Some of those answers
> have come with concerns. That generates discussion.
>
> I think it is good for any project to review why it is operating
> *differently* than the majority of projects here at the ASF. Why is it
> "special"? Are those special considerations actually masking a problem
> underneath? Are those special processes going to hinder the free and
> inclusive participation and community-building that we like to see in
> our projects?
>
> It's fair to ask those questions, especially of a podling. But please
> don't misconstrue discussion as accusation.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>

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