whirr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrei Savu <andrei.s...@cloudsoftcorp.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Policy Change: RTC to CTR
Date Tue, 06 Dec 2011 20:24:55 GMT
Paul I hope so! I'm looking forward to a strong start in 2012 :)
On Dec 6, 2011 10:20 PM, "Paul Baclace" <paul.baclace@gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with Patrick on this.  The real issue is the holiday season.
>
>
> Paul
>
> On 20111206 11:56 , Andrei Savu wrote:
>
>> Patrick I agree 100% but some code is better than no code. I feel like at
>> least for
>> a while I have been the only one constantly watching the email list and
>> doing
>> some work on the open issues.
>>
>> I don't like the fact that we are delaying this release so much and most
>> of
>> the
>> emails I write on the list get no replies from the rest of the core dev
>> team.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Patrick Hunt<phunt@cloudera.com>  wrote:
>>
>>  My .02 -- a core assumption of CTR is that people are actively
>>> reviewing changes. The intent of CTR is not to reduce oversight.
>>> That's an anti-pattern.
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Andrei Savu<savu.andrei@gmail.com>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I want to propose that we change from Review-Then-Commit to
>>>> Commit-Then-Review
>>>> for a while with the amendment that complicated changes still require
>>>>
>>> code
>>>
>>>> review.
>>>>
>>>> The main reason I am asking this is because over the last few weeks I
>>>>
>>> have
>>>
>>>> noticed
>>>> a lack of engagement from the members of the core development team and
>>>>
>>> this
>>>
>>>> slows
>>>> down things a lot. I am happy to see more and more people using Whirr
>>>>
>>> and I
>>>
>>>> think we
>>>> should keep on developing things as fast as possible.
>>>>
>>>> We can go back to RTC later as soon as we have 3+ active committers.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> -- Andrei Savu
>>>>
>>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message