Jim Jagielski wrote:
I have no idea how you could possibly justify that statement.
With RTC one *requires* 3 +1 votes. The above does not.
And STATUS is there to indicate what *will* be done, not
what *has* been done.
It's usually a good idea to actually read and understand
posts before automatically disagreeing with them :)
Right, but this still strikes me as too little review for important
patches, and too much chore for trivial bugfixing.
However, I agree that different rules could be put in place for
different branches depending on their level of maturity (the STATUS at
the root of the branch could indicate the current commit procedure that
is in place).
As far as I am concerned, the goal is to avoid chaotic development and
the unavoidable nagging conflicts that go along with it. By itself, I
don't see any problem having a slightly slower pace of development, since:
- conflicts result in months of wasted time at the ASF since there's no
central authority
- some feature work is sometimes neglected, and (unfortunately) causes a
much longer delay that any commit procedure ever could (ex: JSP 2.1)
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
