On Feb 13, 2009, at 12:19, ringmaster wrote:
> I would like to suggest an addition to Habari commit policy. > > When reverting a previous commit in whole due to a subjective issue > (as opposed to an issue that causes demonstrable breakage or > insecurity), some discussion on whether the revert should take place > must take place, as is required by a veto based on technical grounds. > This discussion needs to be recorded and available for the community > to participate. The revert commit message must link to the discussion > in a place where community-wide discussion can continue. In the case > of a revert to fix breakage or insecurity, the commit message should > clearly indicate the addressed issue, as usual. > > Opening a thread for discussion even immediately before commiting a > revert should be the minimal requirement for any revert. Subsequent > discussion on the topic should determine the outcome of the code; > whether to keep the original code or keep the reverted code. +1. This is more or less the definition of Commit Then Review. Reverting anything subjective, without discussion, is community- damaging. Reverting a commit that caused breakage is common sense. I expect that the difficulty happens when there's a difference of opinion over whether something is subjective, or breakage. If there's a chance for ambiguity, err on the side of opening a dialog about it. -- Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of earth And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
