I agree that RTC is better for us, although in case of build breakage, I'm okay 
with CTR in that case.


On Aug 31, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jakob Homan wrote:

> RTC is definitely the way to go (he said with a weary sigh).
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Owen O'Malley <o...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>> All,
>>   It seems that we've implicitly picked review then commit (RTC) instead of 
>> commit then review (CTR). Apache projects allow either approach and I'm fine 
>> with either. We should just state what we are doing.
>>   I'd also like to propose that we keep a CHANGES.txt file that includes who 
>> contributed and committed each patch. I've created GIRAPH-19 to do that.
>> Thoughts?
>> -- Owen

Reply via email to