+1 But in what way are we going to perform such tasks/ procedure?
Given a quick search on the internet, there are several tools and methods employed for this procedure: 1.) httpd has voting system that if 3 other developers gave positive (+1) vote and there are no negative (-1) vote[1]. 2.) some linux kernel sub systems use patchwork[2] which tracks/ reports patches series. 3.) Google internally uses Mondrian for code review, which has an open source version released as Rietveld[3]. [1]. Patch Review Processes in Open Source Software Development Communities: A Comparative Case Study. http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2007.426 [2]. Reducing your patch workload with Patchwork. http://linuxplumbersconf.org/2011/ocw/proposals/255 [3]. Mondrian: Code Review on the Web. http://code.google.com/p/rietveld/downloads/detail?name=Mondrian2006.pdf -----Original message----- From:Tommaso Teofili <[email protected]> To:[email protected] Date:Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:41:06 +0200 Subject:Re: Review then commit +1 for me Tommaso 2011/9/27 Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> > Hi, > > Hama committers are on the increase. So it's time to consider the > development process. > > Typically, many apache projects adopt a review-then-commit process. > > What do you think? > > -- > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon > @eddieyoon > -- ChiaHung Lin Department of Information Management National University of Kaohsiung Taiwan
