lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <>
Subject Re: Commit and Review (was "Is Lucene Java trunk still stable for production code?")
Date Sat, 17 Mar 2007 21:13:14 GMT
And by break, I mean all tests pass with the possible exception of  
those related to the new functionality.

Also, the example I gave about payloads is hypothetical.  I'm still  
going to submit a patch.

On Mar 17, 2007, at 12:02 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:

> Hoss wrote:
> > (or in short: we're moving more towards a *true* commit and  
> review model)
> I'm curious as to what you think are the practical implications are  
> for committers for this model?  Do you imagine a change in the  
> workflow whereby we commit and then review or do we stick to the  
> patch approach as committers (contributors will always submit  
> patches)?  It has always been a gray area, where we all kind of  
> know what we can commit w/o creating patches for versus what we  
> should put up patches for.   Just curious, I'm working on the  
> payloads stuff and I know that as long as it compiles, it isn't  
> going to break anything, so in some sense I could commit b/c I know  
> it would make it easier for Michael B. and others to update and  
> review w/o going through the patch process.  On the other hand, the  
> patch approach makes you take one extra good look at what you are  
> doing.
> What do others think?
> -Grant
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Grant Ingersoll
Center for Natural Language Processing

Read the Lucene Java FAQ at 

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message