+1 on committers pushing their own change after a +1. And I think we can keep the "Reviewed by:" to avoid another hop to jira.
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 8:26 PM, Prasad Mujumdar <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > Sounds good to me. It would help us get the patches committed quickly. > > I guess the reviewed by indicate that there's a +1 from another committer, > it's in line with the regular commit message format. > > @Lenni, if we have enough consensus on this, please start a vote thread on > the private list. The project bylaw changes should be formally approved the > by PPMC. > > thanks > Prasad > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Gregory Chanan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1. > > > > What's the purpose of the "Reviewed by" given we could find that > > information on the JIRA? > > > > Greg > > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Lenni Kuff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > I would like to propose a change in the Sentry commit process > > > < > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SENTRY/How+to+commit#Howtocommit-Committingpatches > > > >. > > > Currently, the process recommends that the contributor and person who > > > pushes the code change are different people, with the following > > > exception: "Committers may have to bypass the long drawn process to > > commit > > > the change in order to fix a broken build, or work through a release > > etc." > > > > > > I suggest that we relax this restriction to make it acceptable for a > > > comitter to push their own change, as long as it has a +1 from another > > > committer on the project. The commit messages for these changes should > > > always include a new "(Reviewed by: <Name of Reviewer>)". > > > > > > The motivation is to improve the velocity with which changes can be > > > submitted, while retaining the same level of quality for the project. > > > > > > Please let me know if you object to this proposed change. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Lenni > > > > > > -- Sravya Tirukkovalur
