Ciao a tutti, I'd say Andrea, go ahead and draft something up that we can discuss upon.
My interest is to balance quality with the risk of getting important work delayed or stopped for too long. But let's be honest, if someone is in a hurry to merge something "because a client needs it" or some other reasons like "because I need it" this is simply bad planning. I always tell clients we cannot guarantee if and when something will get pushed to GeoServer or GeoNetwork or GeoTools (projects with a decent community) because there is community discussion and interaction involved. Let me throw the first stone here and I'll throw it to myself. In the past I have pushed some contributions too quickly while I should have fought with the interested parties a bit more to improve quality and have more reviews. On the other hand, in ancient times work I had done have been kept in frozen state for months because a core committer wanted to review and never had the time. IMHO, this should be avoided, we need a clear timeline that states when actions should happen that I can refer to when I do my planning. So, I'd happy to see some wording that we can discuss upon and refine as we go. Regards, Simone Giannecchini == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Simone Giannecchini @simogeo Founder/Director GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) Italy phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 333 8128928 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003 Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003. The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail transmission, viruses, etc. On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Kevin Smith <smit...@draconic.ca> wrote: > On 2016-08-10 01:20 PM, Andrea Aime wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Simone Giannecchini > <simone.giannecch...@geo-solutions.it> wrote: >> >> -1- we should account for reviews in the GSIP process, although we >> don't want that for each individual fix but for larger, new >> functionalities, yes we should. >> -2- accounting for reviews should not lead to delays for who is >> proposing the change. So there should be a fixed windows for reviews > > > While I agree, I also believe that no GSIP should go in without some for of > review. > While the interested parties can earmark a review, we should not allow some > strategically (or luckily) placed > GSIP pull request to just go in without any form of scrutiny. > A second pair of eyes, even if it's just a serious coworker ones, should be > applied > > Yes, I think that's what we all meant. There is still the usual procedure > for merging a pull request in that a committer other than the author should > review it, this would be an additional requirement that anyone who > registered a desire to review during discussion of the GSIP must be given a > week to do so regardless of any other review, although the requested review > can count as the standard review. >> >> >> So I am fine with something along what Ben proposes: >> >> - I can say I'd like to review >> - I have to do it within 1W at most, that time passed the proposer can >> hit the merge button (or someone con do it for him) > > > I can live with that, but with a few amendments: > - For a particularly large request the people volunteering for a review > should > be allowed to request more time (e.g. think of the resource switch, so > large that it broke dead the github diff page) > - No GSIP related pull request ever gets in without someone reviewing it and > the proposer answering the feedback either by providing explanations, or > fixing/completing the code. > - The pull request does not go in until all feedback is addressed, for > disagreements on what should be done the question is brought to the PSC for > discussion > - A GSIP is normally committed in one shot, with all the bits required > (tests, docs). The proposer can ask the PSC for leniency in special > occasions, the PSC will decide if it's ok to allow the split/incremental > application > > Cheers > Andrea > > > -- > == > GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit > http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. > == > > Ing. Andrea Aime > @geowolf > Technical Lead > > GeoSolutions S.A.S. > Via di Montramito 3/A > 55054 Massarosa (LU) > phone: +39 0584 962313 > fax: +39 0584 1660272 > mob: +39 339 8844549 > > http://www.geo-solutions.it > http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it > > AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003 > > Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i > file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro > utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le > finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio > senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia > via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, > cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo > anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per > finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati > dal D.Lgs. 196/2003. > > > > The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for > the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or > proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act > (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection > Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, > copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is > strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named > addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact > immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the > information in this message that has been received in error. The sender does > not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or > completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes > made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of > e-mail transmission, viruses, etc. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic > patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are > consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow, > J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity > planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > Geoserver-devel mailing list > Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel > > > > -- > Kevin Michael Smith > <smit...@draconic.ca> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic > patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are > consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow, > J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity > planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Geoserver-devel mailing list > Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow, J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
