-1 for the same reasons.
Thanks,
Bruno
On 12/23/2014 12:02 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
-1 (binding)
Here's my reasoning. As Bruno said elsewhere a patch has two parts in it:
correctness, and cultural and directional fit with the project. While the
former can be reviewed by a non-committer, the former can not.
On the other hand (and I agree with Bruno again), if a person has
"demonstrated competency" then such a person needs to be brought on board as a
committer. Bigtop, unlike quite a few upstream project, has very reasonable
entry-level expectations. A contributor doesn't have to have a hundred of huge
patches to be accepted in order to become a committer. So, while I understand
the urge of unload the committers from some of the reviews, I think it is
important to a committer to stay well-versed about the development of the
project, instead of relying on someone else to do said committer's job.
Instead, a committer in question should be helping a contributor to gain
enough momentum to gain a commit-bit.
Hopefully, it makes sense.
Cos
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 08:02AM, jay vyas wrote:
Hi folks. Please cast a vote on this idea,... Its not a huge deal either
way, so don't be shy :)... Just thought I'd bring up the idea.
I propose : allowing non commiters to +1 patches as sufficient for commit.
Why? To increase the ability of external community members to increase
productivity in the bigtop process.
The proposal: In cases where a developer has proven comptency/expertise in
an area of the code base, or significantly knowledgeable on the subject
matter or patch in question, we allow a +1 as sufficient for commit.
+1 : Its okay for a non-commiter to +1 a commit, and that is sufficient to
push a patch to master.
-1 : Only commiters can give a official +1 which substantiates to commit to
master.
Thanks !
Jay
