On Mar 16, 2010, at 10:18 AM, Mark Miller wrote: > On 03/16/2010 10:09 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Michael Busch<busch...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Also, we're in review-and-commit process, not commit-and-review. Changes >>> have to be >>> proposed, discussed and ideally attached to jira as patches first. >>> >> Correction, just for the sake of avoiding future confusion (i.e. I'm >> not making any point about this thread): >> >> Lucene and Solr have always officially been CTR. >> For trunk, we normally use a bit of informal lazy consensus for >> anything big, hard, or that might be controvertial... but we are not >> officially RTC. >> >> -Yonik >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> > > In any case, this is a branch. People really want to enforce RTC on a > branch??? Even if that was our official process on trunk (which I agree it > has not been) that's not how the flex branch worked. That's not how the > solr_cloud branch worked. That's not how other previous branches have worked. > > IMO - anyone should be able to create a branch for anything - to play around > with whatever they want. We should encourage this. Branches are good. And > they take up little space. >
+1. Furthermore, it is incumbent on the people working on the branch to then present and discuss when/how to merge to trunk, just like any big patch. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
