2006/1/16, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Under CTR, any change can get committed at any time, although > major ones are supposed to follow the RTC model. Committers > need to ask themselves whether the commit will spark controversy; > if so, they should follow RTC and get support first. ... > The advantage of CTR is prototyping speed. Its disadvantages > are less-assured quality and community divisiveness. Its > enemy is ego. Since criticism occurs after code has been > committed, personal investment is greater and defensiveness > higher. Developers are typically less aware of each others' > work. > > I believe it is safe to say that Geronimo has been operating > in CTR mode, but I think the specifics and ground rules may > not have been spelt out, or need to be again. Is this the > way in which the majority wants to continue to proceed?
Hi Ken, Am I reading it correctly that in CTR when a committer vetoed a commit, it *ought to* be backed out *as soon as it's happened* and discussed afterwards before being committed again? I think we're operating this way and dispate the recent issue it works well. > #ken P-)} -- Jacek Laskowski http://www.laskowski.org.pl
