On 9/13/2010 2:58 PM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: > Hi, > > If I understand correctly, Chukwa is following the review-then-commit > (RTC) pattern: Before every commit, a patch gets posted to a JIRA and > only on positive feedback it is committed. > As far as I can see, this is inherited from Hadoop's policies. > However, most projects at the ASF apply commit-then-review (CTR). CTR > has the advantage of being more agile, requiring less work (creating > issue, patch file, attaching it, waiting for feedback etc.) while > providing full oversight: > Every commit is reviewed by other committers after it happened, can be > discussed, reverted, improved etc. as a 'work in progress'. > It is best practice in CTR-mode to selectively use RTC, e.g. for big > patches or for potentially delicate commits. > > I think Chukwa would profit from changing to CTR, so I'd like to know > what you think about it.
The only useful question is what % of the jira tickets are rejected, or corrected, prior to commit? If this number is very low, I'd suggest that waiting for jira feedback before committing is a waste. As this number grows larger, the amount of work undone in trunk becomes more onerous than the review of open jira tickets.
