+1
On 2018-01-12 16:36, Otto van der Schaaf <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to change review policy for the incubator-pagespeed-* > repositories. > Please cast your +1/0/-1 vote on the following: > > Currently I think this is not explicitly defined, but we wait for at least > one peer review > before merging code, akin to RTC. > It would be good to publicly document the way our project work with regard > to this for > new and potential contributors. > I think we have two distinct commit policies to choose from [1]: > > As there's going to be lots of small changes, to keep some velocity I am > proposing > to switch to Commit-Then-Review (at least temporary). > > [1] From https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html > > 1. Commit-Then-Review > (Often abbreviated 'CTR' or 'C-T-R'.) A policy governing code changes which > permits developers to make changes at will, with the possibility of being > retroactively vetoed. C-T-R is an application of decision making through > lazy consensus. The C-T-R model is useful in rapid-prototyping > environments, but because of the lack of mandatory review it may permit > more bugs through in daily practice than the R-T-C alternative. Compare > R-T-C , and see the description of the voting process. > > 2. Review-Then-Commit > (Often referenced as 'RTC' or 'R-T-C'.) Commit policy which requires that > all changes receive consensus approval in order to be committed. Compare > C-T-R , and see the description of the voting process. > > Otto >
