That's covered in the project bylaws, right? https://zookeeper.apache.org/bylaws.html <https://zookeeper.apache.org/bylaws.html>
-Flavio > On 6 Jun 2019, at 13:49, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Il gio 6 giu 2019, 12:44 Andor Molnar <an...@apache.org > <mailto:an...@apache.org>> ha scritto: > >> Hi folks, >> >> I’ve seen 2 patches committed recently with “-1s" from committers on it. >> >> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/899 < >> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/899> >> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/944 < >> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/944> >> >> Not a big deal in this case and I think they were in a good shape and >> ready to commit, but I’d like to clarify how do we handle voting on pull >> requests. We use github to prepare patches by creating pull requests. >> Github also has a feature of “reviewing” which means that reviewers are >> able to “approve”, “comment” and “request for changes”. In terms of voting >> this means: >> >> - “approve” = +1 >> - “comment” = 0 >> - “request for changes” = -1 >> > > We should enhance the script (we already did it on Bookkeeper for instance) > >> >> In order to commit a patch we need at least 2 binding +1s without binding >> -1. Committers/PMCs are able to veto this way. >> >> Do we agree on this process completely? >> > > Sure > >> >> I know that activity in ZooKeeper community is usually very flaky and >> sometimes it’s hard to find committers to review patches. > > > We have a new wave of contributions and new committers, so fortunately this > is changing. > > > In these cases we usually just commit smaller patches with a single binding >> vote, but I think we should be more careful about binding -1s. >> >> Please in the future if you see my -1 on a patch which you think is ready >> to commit, bug me as hard as it takes. I’ll make every effort to review as >> soon as possible and apologies for any delay. >> > > Sure. > > > Enrico > > >> Thanks, >> Andor
