On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 06:23AM, Vasilisa Sidorova wrote: > In a perfect world I agree with Brane. > > But there is top class from each igniter to trust each others on the 1000% > and always to be ready that something go sideways. This process take time.
Actually, no one is talking about 100% trust. That's why post-commit reviews are welcome, and reverts aren't removed from the table as a faculty of last resort. We are talking about trusting a committer not to do silly things that break the master. People will be making mistakes anyway; reviewers are people too and will be making mistakes as well. There's no way to stop it: but there're ways to mitigate the harm and to make sure bad commits are few and far apart. Cos > So I think that our Jira process should be flexible because Ignite is young > project. > > As a first step we can get together to commit simple fixes without review > and take as a "simple" issues in Jira with "trivial" priority. > > When our community credit of trust will grows up we can review Jira process > and decide to take as a "simple" issues in Jira with "minor" priority or > find some new solution. > > Etc... > > Regards, > Vasilisa > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Jira-Process-tp1816p1917.html > Sent from the Apache Ignite Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
