So quickly on this, how would we define our process within JIRA?

* In Progress - Working on issue, or applying a submitted patch.
* Resolved - Committed, and ready for review. Perhaps add a comment to
the JIRA "Ready for review".
* Closed - Reviewed with at least one +1, and no -1 votes.

How would that be? Just so we know and can avoid confusion.

Johnathan


On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 13:46 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
> Patches are indeed a pain, so I would also be happy to work with CTR in
> general.
> 
> > 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 already experienced problems with patches that gets outdated very fast.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
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> 


Reply via email to