If there's no more opinions/objections/suggestions, let's follow the policies. I've updated Guide for Hama Committers[1] page.
>> - Voting for an appropriate time window that a committer can assume silence >> as a +1 on his patch. Should we vote for this? 1. http://wiki.apache.org/hama/HowToCommit On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> wrote: >>> - Voting for an appropriate time window that a committer can assume silence >>> as a +1 on his patch. > > If it's a trivial issue and every unit tests can be passed, I think we > don't need to wait until reviewed. > > And, we should not change the unit test logic to avoid build failure. > I think it is one of the causes of creating additional bugs. > > On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Tommaso Teofili > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I generally agree with Ed's proposal. >> >> >> 2013/3/15 Suraj Menon <[email protected]> >> >>> +1 Thank you for the information Edward and we start afresh. I think things >>> should be lot simpler within a small team like ours. I am touching on >>> topics related to code and commit protocol here. >>> >>> We are trying to get a resolution on three points and the voting could be >>> done in appropriate channel. Let me know if this is the correct place to do >>> the votings. >>> - Voting for/against "Review then commit" policy >>> >> >> sure, we can vote for that (I think a reasonable compromise could be what >> Doug Cutting comments here >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-8248?focusedCommentId=13247658&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13247658) >> however we can probably create a [DISCUSS] thread before and >> eventually >> vote afterwards so that we can collect different opinions before voting. >> >> >>> - Voting for an appropriate time window that a committer can assume silence >>> as a +1 on his patch. >>> >> >> I think this is part of the above commit policy so I wouldn't say this is >> needed. >> >> >>> - Voting for whether a commit should reflect documentation on Wiki. >>> >> >> Do you mean asking for documentation for some specific issues? >> We can probably discuss also that in a separate thread. >> >> Tommaso >> >> >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Suraj >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Edward J. Yoon <[email protected] >>> >wrote: >>> >>> > Hey all, >>> > >>> > We are seeing some conflicts between committers (especially me and >>> > Thomas?) and a growing number of somewhat arrogant, self-centred >>> > actions. However, I believe that all began with misunderstandings, >>> > misreadings, and insufficient discussions, (we didn't mean it). Let's >>> > don't argue anymore since everyone has different sides. >>> > >>> > Here's my suggestions: >>> > >>> > 1. The RoadMap should be discussed on dev@ and all decisions should be >>> > described on Wiki[1]. >>> > 2. Observance of HowToCommit[2] is required of every committers. >>> > >>> > We might want to edit some plans/policies of RoadMap and HowToCommit. >>> > Please feel free to edit them. >>> > >>> > And, 3. Discussion in very polite terms. >>> > >>> > My only worry is whether we can be able to follow HowToCommit process >>> > everytime. As you know we're only have 3 active committers (= PMCs). >>> > >>> > Any other ideas? >>> > >>> > 1. http://wiki.apache.org/hama/RoadMap >>> > 2. http://wiki.apache.org/hama/HowToCommit >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon >>> > @eddieyoon >>> > >>> > > > > -- > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > @eddieyoon -- Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon @eddieyoon
