This got lost on the PMC list by mistake On Thu 29 Dec 2016 at 14:33, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think we need to vote each change, but I do think we need to look > at a more RTC like model for bigger impact changes. > > I think we can trust developer judgement once we have some guidance in > place > > On Thu 29 Dec 2016 at 14:07, Igor Fedorenko <i...@ifedorenko.com> wrote: > > I agree with the proposed plan and also confirmed both commits SHA1s. > > > > I think/hope that forcing all changes to feature branches and require a > > vote to merge isn't necessary. > > > > I think changes that affect existing integration tests should require a > > vote but I don't think it's practical to discuss/vote all changes. We > > should ask developers to describe "bigger" changes on the dev list > > before they commit, however, and other developers can request the change > > go through a feature branch and vote process. "Smaller" changes can go > > right in. Of course, "big" and "small" is subjective, but I think we > > need to assume Maven developers generally know what they are doing ;-) > > > > We also need to ask that each commit on master represents a single > > complete logical change, to make individual commits easy to understand > > and review. I honestly don't think we have the manpower to review and > > groom each commit to perfection upfront, so it is inevitable that some > > commits will require follow-up changes, but I hope these will be > > exceptions and most of commits on master will be clean and > > self-contained changes. > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Igor > > > > On Thu, Dec 29, 2016, at 07:49 AM, Robert Scholte wrote: > > > thanks Stephen for picking this up. > > > > > > SHA-1: 737de43e392fc15a0ce366db98d70aa18b3f6c03 > > > * [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration > > > > > > Yes, this is the hash I would expect to revert to. > > > Based on the date I would expect that maven-its should be reset to > > > > > > SHA-1: 94bd771c88cc96014ca0ddaa07ac6f778b3c7501 > > > * [MNG-5840] Argh! tests added but not added to suite > > > > > > I like the idea of pushing to 3.5.0 to indicate there was something with > > > 3.4.x > > > > > > My worries are more about: how to manage which issues should be cherry > > > picked and who decides that list. Otherwise we might end up in the same > > > situation. E.g. do we have to do a vote on the branch (which might cover > > > multiple issues but which are related to the same topic) to decide if it > > > can be merged with the master? > > > > > > Robert > > -- > Sent from my phone > -- Sent from my phone
