incubator-hama-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Edward J. Yoon" <edwardy...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Review then commit
Date Tue, 04 Oct 2011 09:57:21 GMT
>> . I would like this (at least +1 from a comitter) to be part of our review-commit
process.

+1

2011/10/4 ChiaHung Lin <chl501@nuk.edu.tw>:
> Hadoop's practice looks good. I would like this (at least +1 from a comitter) to be part
of our review-commit process.
>
> -----Original message-----
> From:Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <vinodkv@hortonworks.com>
> To:hama-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date:Sat, 1 Oct 2011 11:15:06 +0530
> Subject:Re: Review then commit
>
> Apache has the review board: https://reviews.apache.org
>
> Back in Hadoop, we get things via uploading patches to the JIRA issues,
> requiring one single +1 from a committer for the patch to go in.
>
> +vinod
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Thomas Jungblut <
> thomas.jungblut@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1, review tool seems to be a good thing. Do we have something similar in
>> the Apache environment?
>>
>> 2011/9/28 ChiaHung Lin <chl501@nuk.edu.tw>
>>
>> > +1
>> >
>> > But in what way are we going to perform such tasks/ procedure?
>> >
>> > Given a quick search on the internet, there are several tools and methods
>> > employed for this procedure:
>> >
>> > 1.) httpd has voting system that if 3 other developers gave positive (+1)
>> > vote and there are no negative (-1) vote[1].
>> >
>> > 2.) some linux kernel sub systems use patchwork[2] which tracks/ reports
>> > patches series.
>> >
>> > 3.) Google internally uses Mondrian for code review, which has an open
>> > source version released as Rietveld[3].
>> >
>> > [1]. Patch Review Processes in Open Source Software Development
>> > Communities: A Comparative Case Study.
>> > http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2007.426
>> >
>> > [2]. Reducing your patch workload with Patchwork.
>> > http://linuxplumbersconf.org/2011/ocw/proposals/255
>> >
>> > [3]. Mondrian: Code Review on the Web.
>> > http://code.google.com/p/rietveld/downloads/detail?name=Mondrian2006.pdf
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original message-----
>> > From:Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teofili@gmail.com>
>> > To:hama-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Date:Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:41:06 +0200
>> > Subject:Re: Review then commit
>> >
>> > +1 for me
>> > Tommaso
>> >
>> > 2011/9/27 Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org>
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > Hama committers are on the increase. So it's time to consider the
>> > > development process.
>> > >
>> > > Typically, many apache projects adopt a review-then-commit process.
>> > >
>> > > What do you think?
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> > > @eddieyoon
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > ChiaHung Lin
>> > Department of Information Management
>> > National University of Kaohsiung
>> > Taiwan
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thomas Jungblut
>> Berlin <thomas.jungblut@gmail.com>
>>
>
>
> --
> ChiaHung Lin
> Department of Information Management
> National University of Kaohsiung
> Taiwan
>



-- 
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon

Mime
View raw message