Exactly.
On 2019. 06. 06. 14:51, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > 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 <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Il gio 6 giu 2019, 12:44 Andor Molnar <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 >
