Mailing-List: contact solr-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mike.klaas@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.92.172 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=gWxFY0jPNs7zrcqrmyN2ZAaQZVHZsfVoej++T1A5/UgrtRetpN4WMnuOKDvDkSRc6zhsuoeoOPr2RuwjNHOaFXPRVyWwKmqYgujGzTEVmK/KpRLB8JbdFeZ/uBXiKJM1jUX3ECiEZByG3uTRQh/Ngf9jlFUIiHDJdpBfTzDJO84=
Message-ID: <3d2ce8cb0704271035we219812h70a20f7fcfd22d3a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:35:51 -0700
From: "Mike Klaas" <mike.klaas@gmail.com>
To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Do we agree on our RTC way of working? (was: Welcome Ryan
 McKinley!)
In-Reply-To: <f767f0600704270059l2ae1ee5fp2e7a1da3100f72b7@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <f767f0600704270059l2ae1ee5fp2e7a1da3100f72b7@mail.gmail.com>

On 4/27/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:

> 2.. Non-trivial patches require a [VOTE] on the dev list before being
> committed. What's "non-trivial"? I'd suggest using our common sense
> and trusting each other to judge this, for a start.

"Non-trivial" seems a little weak to require a [VOTE] (which by the
bylaws of apache require three +1s??).  I could see major
architectural decisions requiring a vote, but I think a single review
is sufficient for committing most patches.

Another issue is backward compatibility.  It might be a good idea to
develop some guidelines in this regard (perhaps "functionality that is
being changed requires @deprecation in at least one minor version
before being changed").  We can support it for longer than that, of
course, but it would be nice to provide some guarantee.

-Mike