Hey- So, I'd like to get feedback on a fresh proposal. We're all interested (I think) in seeing things move more quickly through the ticket queue. I'm also interested in seeing more people contributing to OpenLayers as committers.
With that in mind, I think it makes sense to have an explicit path to becoming a trunk committer. We currently have two different roles with regard to code contributions: sandbox commit (given out to anyone who asks), and trunk commit (given out after some process of proving oneself). Reviewer role ------------- I'd like to add a "reviewer" role between the two. The reviewer role would be given to someone who has demonstrated a commitment to the project and shows good sense through code contributions (patches, comments, etc.). Reviewers would then be eligible for trunk commit access after continued demonstration of commitment and good sense (all vague, I know). Non-API commits --------------- Then, I'd like to say we amend our trunk commit policy to say that modifications that don't change the API (no API additions, no changes to API method signatures) require review by either a reviewer or a trunk committer. This could be made clear by adding an "API Review" state to the state field for tickets. Tickets with "Review" can get reviewed by reviewers or trunk committers. Tickets with "API Review" require review by a trunk committer. I imagine it is also possible to add a reviewer role to trac permissions - making the state field editable only by reviewers. Trivial commits --------------- Even with more reviewers (and I'd like to significantly expand our reviewer pool), I imagine there will be an interest in speeding up the commit process. I proposed some language on the TrunkCommits wiki page for trivial commits. I'm open to hearing suggestions on expanding that to include other simple bug fixes or modifications. There are a handful of reasons why I prefer a path like this to the "commits without review" path. Primarily, it's about getting more people involved in the project - which I believe will let us sustain a successful project. I also believe that removing the review process makes it *harder* to give out commit access. That is, we raise the bar when we remove the review process. Chris, this is not about you. I have no concern about you making commits without review. This is about broadening the project beyond a few select contributers. In addition, I think adding a reviewer role would give contributers a better chance to demonstrate commitment and good sense. I appreciate the chance to review patches because I feel like it helps understand how another developer thinks. By reviewing each other's code, we synchronize our style and thinking. I believe that this benefits the project by giving it a more uniform behavior and feel. I can't see how this happens (with new contributers in particular) if we all operate independently. I meant to keep this simple. I'm really just proposing a reviewer role. Not trying to solve all problems - but I think this would get at a number of issues we are currently dealing with. Thanks for any feedback, Tim _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
