Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of markrmiller@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.218.220 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=SWq7v4fcdwY1UA0FXrsbN2F1PNJJPIWlWPg4p8Q+JhGso6X4Osbl16Qb0DMJEz+cy/
         VGrhDJQEc1PX0Mk6Zuaj10uNrRhNvZeoO5Zi2FJeh/Qyf2I1fYTWqGkDfPLWPr297bo5
         lktAJrmJp3wzk4eSmTYP9tN2FLKvSbTO5h6Rg=
Message-ID: <4B9F932A.2020205@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:18:18 -0400
From: Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100316 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: lucene and solr trunk
References: <c68e39171003152028w36d47f46g37b52d1495ea6db4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.64.1003152054400.4357@radix.cryptio.net>
	 <016401cac4d8$eabf3520$c03d9f60$@de>
	 <f18c9dde1003160043q3a8cb8bbg9f033cfb1b5817cd@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4B9F3895.7010600@gmail.com>
 <c68e39171003160709v66532266i7a92437c10852d08@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c68e39171003160709v66532266i7a92437c10852d08@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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.


Branch changes have to be proposed, discussed, and attached to JIRA? 
Uggg - I certainly hope not.

Branches should be considered replacements for huge unwieldy patches. Do 
I have to propose and discuss before I put up a patch?

-- 
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org