> From: Jeff Trawick [Sent: Mittwoch, 10. Juli 2013 21:04 > To: Apache HTTP Server Development List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Lazy Consensus for 2.4.x backports > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Jim Jagielski <[email protected]> wrote: > Pulling this out as a proposal: > > I propose that we track all backports in 2.4 STATUS as we currently > do. Each backport is time-tagged and we operate under a lazy > consensus. Assuming no -1 votes within 96 hours, the backport > can be applied to 2.4.x. If the backport gets 3 +1 votes sooner > than that, then it can be applied asap... > > As with ALL patches, any commit can be reverted for good > technical (or legal) reasons. > > [ ] +1: Agree with this proposal (to start post 2.4.5 release) > [ ] -1: Disagree with this proposal (and why) > > -1 > > The current process > > * works well/appropriately IMO; to me that means pretty good stream of fixes > to 2.4.x without too high a risk of regressions > * has demonstrably resulted in a reasonably small number of regressions so > far across 2.4.x and earlier releases (definitely not zero > regressions, but > pretty darn low). > > I think that it is a safe assumption that there will be code changes in > stable releases that have had less review if we make this > change. Largely regression-free stable releases are of crucial importance > for infrastructure software like httpd, more so than > getting another window-size worth of fixes into the release, especially if > they've been looked at less than the others. > > If I count right, 80% or more of the fixes potentially in 2.4.next are > already there (I didn't count mod_lua.) That doesn't seem so > bad.
Well put and I agree with this. So -1 from me as well. Regards Rüdiger
