On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:38:40PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >... > Should at some point we switch httpd-2.0 to a Review-then-Commit > model? If so, when? If not, why not?
Short answer: no, not for a while, see below. The dev guidelines state: "All product changes to the currently active repository are subject to lazy consensus. All product changes to a prior-branch (old version) repository require consensus before the change is committed." Thus, the httpd-2.0 repository remains CTR until we open up a new repository. The basic story is that developers need a place where they can iterate on their ideas at their own pace. That is the "active repository". > I guess I'm scared that someone will start adding things that > will destabilize the server without having it appropriately > reviewed *before* committing. Too bad :-) You have several options here: * trust that people are going to be relatively smart about this (my favorite) * review the change after it was committed; you can always modify the change and/or veto it. * start a new repository / branch / whatever Note that the 1.3 repository is still operating commit-then-review. By convention, bug fixes go into that thing as a commit, with a review later. Feature changes *should* have a patch first, but people have been REALLY BAD about that (I won't mention names, but will mention that Ken has been *good* about posting feature change patches first). Personally, I view httpd-2.0 as a completely open and active repository. I even consider API changes as somewhat acceptable. :-) Re: API changes. That is what we have ap_mmn.h for. However, what we've done in the past (and I agree with), is that we balance an MMN bump against whatever is causing the problem. We don't want to invalidate third-party modules just to add some stupid edge case feature. I would recommend that we continue with httpd-2.0 for a few months. At that time, we can set up an httpd-2.1 or httpd-3.0 repository (or both!) in Subversion. Moving to Subversion also neatly avoids the question of whether to start a new CVS module or to use CVS branches :-) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/