Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > Well, yes, the patch should have reviewed. Lately I see in a couple of > projects that patches are there for ever. > > That is really bad, more if you have the "power" to commit it. I > personally are more motivate by a quick review and if possible commit. > > We need to consider that most of us are developing customer projects, > where we need this fixes. If they are not going relative quick in the > code base some of are forced to fork for the customer (really bad). If > you have done this a couple of time and your patches still are not part > of the code base one tends to stop submitting patches. > > However I do not really see the need to have the rule review-then-commit > for lenya-committer. IMO that highly depends on the change. I lately > could fix some minor issues (typos, ...) where I did not ask whether or > not I could commit. Other commits however I asked and got a quick answer > (thanks again). I can remember that we said this is ok. > Yes, that's absolutely fine. Although for non-minor-issues a RTC would be prefered, there is no problem with doing CTR. But if a commit is reviewed and if there are comments/problems then the committer should take responsibility and act accordingly.
Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
