lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>
Subject Re: lucene and solr trunk
Date Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:48:41 GMT

On Mar 16, 2010, at 10:18 AM, Mark Miller wrote:

> On 03/16/2010 10:09 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Michael Busch<buschmic@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Also, we're in review-and-commit process, not commit-and-review.  Changes have
to be
>>> proposed, discussed and ideally attached to jira as patches first.
>>> 
>> Correction, just for the sake of avoiding future confusion (i.e. I'm
>> not making any point about this thread):
>> 
>> Lucene and Solr have always officially been CTR.
>> For trunk, we normally use a bit of informal lazy consensus for
>> anything big, hard, or that might be controvertial... but we are not
>> officially RTC.
>> 
>> -Yonik
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>> 
>> 
> 
> In any case, this is a branch. People really want to enforce RTC on a branch??? Even
if that was our official process on trunk (which I agree it has not been) that's not how the
flex branch worked. That's not how the solr_cloud branch worked. That's not how other previous
branches have worked.
> 
> IMO - anyone should be able to create a branch for anything - to play around with whatever
they want. We should encourage this. Branches are good. And they take up little space.
> 

+1.  Furthermore, it is incumbent on the people working on the branch to then present and
discuss when/how to merge to trunk, just like any big patch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message