I agree, at least one +1 from a committer as a minimum bar is pretty reasonable. For bigger changes usually having more people review and test makes sense, but I've seen that handled as more of a one off.
I'm usually in favor of a 24 hour wait as well, but could see it go either way here. Jon On Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 16:44 <[email protected]> wrote: > I would recommend to make contributing to Spot as easily as possible > because any hurdle or obstacle will make contributing harder and thus will > discourage potential long term contributors. > > Pretty much all other projects that I’m involved with at ASF are following > something in the lines of what Nate is describing. Anyone on the internet > can submit a patch and all it takes is a single committer who does review > and then the patch is merged to master branch. Some projects do a “cool > off" window before the “review” and “merge” to make sure that other > committers have time to jump in - projects like Hadoop and Hive tend to > give 24 hours, projects like Sqoop or Flume simply commit immediately. Any > other committer however have always a chance to jump in and pretty much > VETO the patch — provided there is a good explanation for the push back. > > Jarcec > > > On Sep 21, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Michael Ridley <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Sounds like a good approach. I'm all in favor of following a process > that > > works for other ASF projects. > > > > Speaking of votes by committer, I think any vote would be recorded as > > binding or non-binding based on committer status. I am not a committer > so > > I always make sure to mark mine as non-binding. > > > > Michael > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Nate Smith <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Also, > >> > >> As a point of consideration it's good to highlight that in such a > scenario > >> where a +1 is given and 48 hours to review prior to merge, any -1 should > >> reset the vote in my mind. Votes of such nature would have to be > restricted > >> to committers on the project. > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Nate Smith <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> From my own experience and also in talking directly with a few > committers > >>> to the project the requirement for three +1's from committers should be > >>> reviewed. > >>> > >>> My understanding is that other projects in the ASF simply require one > >> vote > >>> and provide some time for review by others prior to merging (such as a > >>> 24-48 hour period). However more emphasis is placed on refining code in > >>> preparation for releases. > >>> > >>> As it stands today we require at least three +1's before merge, and > there > >>> is no time requirement. > >>> > >>> Since we are a growing community, and the goal is to develop more code > >>> contributors I think it is important to bring this up for review in > hopes > >>> that we can adopt something that allows faster iterations with a strong > >>> focus on polishing for future releases. > >>> > >>> - Nathanael > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Michael Ridley <[email protected]> > > office: (650) 352-1337 > > mobile: (571) 438-2420 > > Senior Solutions Architect > > Cloudera > > -- Jon
