On 10/31/26 1:15 PM, Eric Covener 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
This sounds a bit different than the thing explained in the text above.
My understanding is that a committer that wants to backport something still
needs an approval by another committer. The line above sounds like if you
can backport without if CI is fine.
Regards
Rüdiger
