+1 with 48 hours period Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 21, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Jon Zeolla <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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
