If tagged on PR, esp. for content, happy to review (believe I have sufficient bandwidth to assist there). Ideally with guidelines on what would make content not acceptable.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 6:43 AM Sönke Liebau <[email protected]> wrote: > > Lets wait a little for some more people to chime in and then start a vote > thread tomorrow if there are no strong objections. > > On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 13:32, Lars Francke <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > But, as I said, while I have concerns I am personally willing to try > > > something else - so won't stand in the way of commit then review. > > > > > > > the same is true for me. We briefly discussed this a few months ago. > > I'd love to have the time to review everything but I have to admit to > > myself that I don't so in order to make more progress we should try > > something different. > > > > I'd be happy to vote +1 for any other proposal. > > > > Cheers, > > Lars > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Sönke > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 12:55, Christofer Dutz <[email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Sönke, > > > > > > > > thanks for bringing this up ... Yes ... don't know if you were > > referring > > > > to me, but I did really stop contributing, because I thought the > > process > > > > was getting in the way of getting stuff done. > > > > > > > > I would suggest to definitely go to "commit then review" for content. > > We > > > > could consider staying at "review then commit" for the tooling and main > > > > theme stuff, as this would affect others more than content does. But I > > > > would also opt for going to the simper process in general and perhaps > > > > change things if things go south. > > > > > > > > I think my unreviewed PR that lay dormant for months is a great > > > > demonstration of the "review then commit" not working. > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 24.01.20, 12:09 schrieb "Sönke Liebau" <[email protected] > > > > .INVALID>: > > > > > > > > Hi everybody, > > > > > > > > as mentioned in our current board report I feel like we should > > > revisit > > > > the > > > > commit and review guidelines [1] that we currently have in place. > > > > > > > > I have heard that in at least one instance individuals decided to > > > stop > > > > contributing to this project because doing so was overly > > complicated > > > > and > > > > regulated - which personally I take as a serious red flag. > > > > > > > > What do people think, should we move to a commit then review model, > > > for > > > > everything, just for content contributions, treat code separately, > > > ... > > > > > > > > Personally I'd like to at least see some sort of check in place > > that > > > > only > > > > content that was actually reviewed makes it into a release. > > > > Personally, I feel that commit then review will lead to a large > > > amount > > > > of > > > > unreviewed content, but if I am the only one that thinks so I am > > > > willing to > > > > adapt and try something else :) > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Sönke > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://training.apache.org/developers/contributing.html#_toc_review_process1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sönke Liebau > > > Partner > > > Tel. +49 179 7940878 > > > OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany > > > > > > > > -- > Sönke Liebau > Partner > Tel. +49 179 7940878 > OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany
