On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Lenni Kuff <[email protected]> wrote:
> Good point Sravya. I think adding criteria such as all changes > 100 lines > of code would overcomplicate things and be hard to follow. One of the goals > here is to be sure we have more than one set of eyes on a change before it > gets committed. Even though it adds a wait time for small patches, it could > help catch a problem where someone introduced an incompatibility in a > public interface with a tiny change. We could add an exception to > short-circuit the cool-off period if the change is to unblock the build - a > compile failure, test failure, etc. That would ensure urgent patches can > still get committed quickly. > We could also have an exclusion for development branches - since they might need to iterate more quickly. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Lenni > > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 6:49 AM, Sravya Tirukkovalur <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I think cool off makes sense in general, but i think it would be an >> unnecessary overhead for smallish patches, bug fixes, test fixes. Might >> create a dependency which can significantly delay development pace. But I >> do understand defining the criteria might be tricky, thoughts? >> >> Sravya >> >> > On Nov 10, 2015, at 6:26 PM, Sun, Dapeng <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > +1 for 24 hours. >> > >> > I usually waited for 24 hours and committed. I think people in >> community could join the jira discussion after jira created or patch >> available. 24 hours is enough to give a buffer for people in different time >> zones. >> > >> > About the detail, how about "24 hours after first +1 if there's no >> objection"? We can also updated >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SENTRY/How+to+commit after >> discussion. >> > >> > Regards >> > Dapeng >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:[email protected]] >> > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:58 AM >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Cool off period for commits? >> > >> > Can you go into more detail how this would work? >> > >> >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015, at 02:25 PM, Lenni Kuff wrote: >> >> Currently Sentry has not policy in place for a cool off period for >> >> commits (time after patch has gotten +1'ed that the change can be >> >> committed). >> >> This >> >> limits the opportunity other people in the community can review a >> >> change prior to it going in. This is particularly important since we >> >> have committers across many different time zones >> >> >> >> What do you all think about adding a cool-off period for all commits >> >> after a patch has gotten a +1? The Hive project uses 24 hours, so we >> >> could go with that. Could also use something longer like 48 or 72 >> >> hours. Thoughts? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Lenni >> > >> > >> > Best, >> > >> > jzb >> > -- >> > Joe Brockmeier >> > [email protected] >> > Twitter: @jzb >> > http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ >> > >
