Good thing you brought this up. I think we should go with CTR. We have already experienced problems with patches that gets outdated very fast. Manual rebasing is time wasting, error prone and extremely boring :) .
// Roger On Aug 2, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > Hi guys, > > now that you have commit access, I think it's a better solution to apply your > modification directly in the code base. Attaching patches to JIRA is good, > but it forces someone to apply them. > > If you'd like to discuss a proposed patch, then the best is to attach the > patch to a mail and start a discussion. > > Now, it's up to you. In fact, you have two options when it comes to commits : > - c-t-r (commit-then-review) > - r-t-c (review then-commit) > > The first option is considered as the standard politic at Apache. Most of the > project just let people commit, then eventually review the patches. It > assumes than a -1 (veto) on a commit requires a reverse and a discussion > should then be started. Vetoing a commit is not an insult, it's just a way to > say that there might be an issue with the commit. > > The second option is used in mature projects (like httpd) which simply can't > accept a breakage. I'm not sure that deft is old nor stable enough :) > > Keep in mind that what is important here is to ease the development process, > and as it seems you are very active, one way to avoid conflicts (I mean, code > breakage, not fights between people ;) is to split the code in modules, with > committers working on separate modules. In other words, decoupling. > > This is just an advice, again, your choice :) > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com >
