Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Sep 10, 2007, at 4:47 PM, Remy Maucherat wrote:
The main idea is that since there's only one trunk branch, there
should be agreement on APIs and important topics to proceed
++1. So let's start that now. Since there is not agreement on APIs,
how do we proceed from here? Or, in other words, how do achieve
agreement on APIs?
Actually, there's no need for a full agreement for a reviewed patch
(from what I've written about a limited CTR mechanism): it's a need to
pass the vote with a +3 margin. This means most people care and agree
with you, but this does not mean it's a unanimous vote either.
If the community is evenly split and nothing moves, then there is never
going to be a solution at Apache except eventually agree to fork the
project.
If people don't care enough to vote (as long as the review mechanism is
infrequent enough and not too inconvenient), then I think there's a
problem with the patch or the way it was presented.
Shame that you think that various "useless rules" are those rules that
have been used by the ASF and numerous ASF projects for years and
years... that these "useless rules" are those which Incubator
podlings must understand and utilize in order to become a "real"
ASF project...
This statement is a bit too aggressive, since it seems obvious that if
there's a disagreement, you cannot keep on developing in an official
branch like trunk, but that a proper proposal should be used instead.
CTR for API changing patches (and for patches for which committers think
is needed) works pretty much like the usual proposal mechanism. However,
it puts down the rules in black and white about what sort of commit is
concerned by them and how it happens.
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
