shindig-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: RTC vs CTR was ( Review Request: Allow container implementations to more easily override and extend rpc registered service handlers. )
Date Thu, 26 Jul 2012 01:08:03 GMT
Yes I can. Let me take a stab drafting one in the Shindig wiki so we
could discuss and improve.

- Henry

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Ryan Baxter <rbaxter85@apache.org> wrote:
> Henry would you want to take a stab at drafting up Shindig's? :)
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Oh yeah totally not copying from Hadoop bylaws =)
>>
>> What I meant "similar" was to have a written bylaws as guidance for
>> committers and PMCs.
>>
>> - Henry
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.
>> <mfranklin@mitre.org> wrote:
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Henry Saputra [mailto:henry.saputra@gmail.com]
>> >>Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 4:15 PM
>> >>To: dev@shindig.apache.org
>> >>Subject: Re: RTC vs CTR was ( Review Request: Allow container
>> >>implementations to more easily override and extend rpc registered service
>> >>handlers. )
>> >>
>> >>I am thinking about having Apache Shindig bylaws similar to what
>> >>Apache Hadoop has: http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html which govern
>> >>how code commits should be conducted.
>> >
>> > +1, though I would use a different community's bylaws as an example [1].
>>  Their definition of Lazy consensus is a little off to me.   Ross Gardler
>> wrote Rave's and it covers the concept well[2].
>> >
>> > [1] http://hc.apache.org/bylaws.html  (note the section on #Code_Review)
>> > [2] http://rave.apache.org/docs/governance/lazyConsensus.html
>> >
>> >>
>> >>I'd like the simplicity of CTR but it needs to have good boundaries. I
>> >>really dont want us to come back to the old model where commits and
>> >>reviews just done with some people working in the same companies.
>> >>Reviews could be done early with some people but at the end should
>> >>targeted to dev list for final approval.
>> >>
>> >>- Henry
>> >>
>> >>On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.
>> >><mfranklin@mitre.org> wrote:
>> >>> Most communities I have seen eventually adopt a Commit Then Review
>> >>model over a Review Then Commit model.  Due to the complexity of
>> Shindig, I
>> >>can understand wanting to make sure that bigger changes are reviewed;
>> >>however, for trivial changes such as this, would it be easier to just
>> commit the
>> >>change?
>> >>>
>> >>> I am not a committer, so it is really up to you all.  IMO, it is a lot
>> of overhead
>> >>to review everything :) .  If you do move to a CTR model, I would suggest
>> >>setting some boundaries so that you work into the model.  Maybe saying
>> that
>> >>any change with x lines, etc.
>> >>>
>> >>>>-----Original Message-----
>> >>>>From: Dan Dumont [mailto:noreply@reviews.apache.org] On Behalf Of
Dan
>> >>>>Dumont
>> >>>>Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 2:28 PM
>> >>>>To: shindig; Dan Dumont
>> >>>>Subject: Review Request: Allow container implementations to more
easily
>> >>>>override and extend rpc registered service handlers.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
>> >>>>https://reviews.apache.org/r/6141/
>> >>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Review request for shindig.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Description
>> >>>>-------
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Change rpc registration to return the old handler if there were any
so
>> that
>> >>>>container implementations may call into the previously registered
>> handler if
>> >>>>they wish to extend the existing behavior.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>This addresses bug SHINDIG-1827.
>> >>>>    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1827
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Diffs
>> >>>>-----
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascri
>> >>pt/
>> >>>>features/container/container.js 1365569
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/shindig/trunk/features/src/main/javascri
>> >>pt/
>> >>>>features/rpc/rpc.js 1365569
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/6141/diff/
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Testing
>> >>>>-------
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Tests pass.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Thanks,
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Dan Dumont
>> >>>
>>

Mime
View raw message