On Wed, Apr 2, 2025 at 7:12 PM Piotr P. Karwasz <pi...@mailing.copernik.eu> wrote:
> Hi all, > Sorry, my e-mail client reformatted some lines. > So, the concerned repos are all non-dormant Java repos: l-admin, l-jdk, > l-jmx-gui, l-log4j2, l-log4j-jakarta, l-log4j-kotlin, l-log4j-samples, > l-log4j-scala, l-log4j-transform, l-log4j-tools, l-parent. > > Vote 1. Require a pull request before merging: > [ ] +1, enable this feature > [ ] -1, do not enable this feature > +1 > Vote 2. Require conversation resolution before merging: > [ ] +1, enable this feature > [ ] -1, do not enable this feature > +1 (Granted that the conversation author responds within a reasonable time frame, i.e., max. 1 week.) > Vote 3. Require linear history (Prevent merge commits from being pushed > to code branches. Only "Squash" and similar allowed): > [ ] +1, enable this feature > [ ] -1, do not enable this feature > +999 All major F/OSS projects work like this, including OpenJDK. A majority of PRs contain several noise commits; "apply review suggestions", "redo stuff", "fix typos", etc. They bring no value but pollute the history. Plus, `cherry-pick`ing and `revert`ing merge PRs are more difficult compared to squashed ones. Gentlemen, *please please please squash your commits before merging a PR!* > Vote 4. Require status checks to pass before merging: > [ ] +1, enable this feature > [ ] -1, do not enable this feature > +1 Even though it sounds nice, there were several occasions in the past where the CI is broken for all jobs, or for some particular platform, etc. > Vote 5. Require at least one positive review before merging: > [ ] +1, enable this feature > [ ] -1, do not enable this feature > +999 (Assuming you meant "Approval" with "positive review".)
