+1 Cheers
Jean-Frederic Remy Maucherat wrote: > Hi, > > Another more precise draft. > > Patches which would go to review would be: > - API changing patches (any protected or above signature change) on APIs > which are accessible to the user either from confirguration or > programmatically > - any other commit for which a committer asks for the RTC procedure > should be rollbacked if it hinders concurrent work or is to be included > in a release tag, and go through the RTC procedure > > The RTC procedure would include a STATUS file in the Tomcat svn listing > all pending "up to review" changes. A successful vote with a +3 margin > is required. A patch can remain under review for as long as the > committer wishes, and it should be allowed to freely "advertise" and > discuss the vote. > > The idea would be to force a consensus for commits which could have > significant implications, and help stage technical discussions (rather > than discussions about the validity of the disagreement). It would > introduce a small delay for committing certain patches and a minor > slowdown for development pace in theory, but in practice I've noticed > conflicts waste a lot more time. > > This would also mean it is possible to make a change that a number of > committers oppose (possibly, would veto) if enough committers are in > favor of it. > > Rémy > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
