On Sat, Oct 31, 2026 at 8:15 AM Eric Covener <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, vote version of this thread since it looks promising: > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/dpnfl07kjns2w5q6jlj1r5nppgwkn145 > > Context (for non-CTR components) > > In SVN / STATUS, three committer approvals are required. Self-review > is counted, so in practice there are two independent +1s needed. > > I propose with this vote that we reduce this by 1 in practice and also > establish some guidance on what non-STATUS review is. > > * With passing (or explainable) CI only two committer approvals are > needed. Without CI, an additional committer review is needed. > * Committer approval includes: github review, PR comment, explicit > dev@ email approval, security@ review, or the merge itself. > > This means that in practice for committers Alice and Bob that if Alice > proposes a PR against 2.4.x, and CI doesn't regress, a single review > (including just a LGTM comment) from Bob is all that's needed for > Alice to move on to merging the work. > > In the case where Alice is not a committer: Two different committers > should do a combination of passing review/comment/merge. The 2nd > doesn't need to do anything explicit. > > > [ ] +1: Allow two approvals, including self-approval with CI > [ ] +0: I don't feel great about this but... > [ ] -1: This is bad.
my +1
