Re: [VOTE] commit-then-review vs review-then-commit policy

Martin Sebor wrote: I think the discussion has wound down so let's have a vote and decide whether stdcxx committers should follow the Commit-Then Review (CTR) or Review-Then-Commit (RTC) policy on stdcxx/trunk by default. [+1] All committers follow Commit-Then-Review for safe changes,

RE: [VOTE] commit-then-review vs review-then-commit policy

[+1] All committers follow Commit-Then-Review for safe changes, Review-Then-Commit for potentially breaking changes. What constitutes a breakng change is a judgment call to be made by each committer. The rule of thumb is that changes which involve

Re: [VOTE] commit-then-review vs review-then-commit policy

Sorry for the delay. Here's my vote: On May 21, 2007, at 5:17 PM, Martin Sebor wrote: I think the discussion has wound down so let's have a vote and decide whether stdcxx committers should follow the Commit-Then Review (CTR) or Review-Then-Commit (RTC) policy on stdcxx/trunk by default. [x]

Re: [VOTE] commit-then-review vs review-then-commit policy

I suppose I should cast my own vote on this... Martin Sebor wrote: I think the discussion has wound down so let's have a vote and decide whether stdcxx committers should follow the Commit-Then Review (CTR) or Review-Then-Commit (RTC) policy on stdcxx/trunk by default. [+1] All committers