1) I agree with Rj on that, we don't need to change the rules for being a commiter - it's a big responsibility and imo a achievement to be proud of to be a commiter on bigtop, and I don't think we need to dilute that.
So back on topic... :) 2) Given that we are quite small at the moment, we just need to remove any barriers to getting good solid updates into bigtop, and doing so, possibly make it easier for existing very busy commiters to focus on adding new features, rather than reviewing patches which they aren't really that interested in... Example: I'd rather trust Debian expert review pig fixes for Ubuntu packaging the review it myself, wether I'm a commiter or not. > On Dec 22, 2014, at 6:18 AM, RJ Nowling <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't think know that my work meets the necessary requirements. I'm focused > primarily on BigPetStore, not the larger code base, while others such as Evan > have contributed more than I have and more broadly to the core code base than > I have yet they aren't committers yet. > > Just my two cents... > > >> On Dec 20, 2014, at 6:54 PM, Bruno Mahé <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Why not make RJ a commiter? >> >> From my understanding a review has at least 2 parts: >> 1/ Is the intended change correct. >> 2/ Does this change fit into the project's standards, culture. >> >> A change may perfectly be correct from a 1/ perspective but may require some >> changes because of some issues related to 2/ >> >> Thanks, >> Bruno >> >>> On 12/17/2014 12:21 PM, jay vyas wrote: >>> Hi bigtop. >>> >>> Is it okay for us to commit bigtop-bigpetstore/ updates if RJ +1's them ? >>
