On 02.07.2015, at 22:51, oliver gondža <[email protected]> wrote: > In fact, I do not understand the motivation behind this. You care for reviews > so much that it takes several Jenkins veterans to incorporate trivial javadoc > change, though you are fine if other people merge changes (that will > eventually find its way into your product) without any review. To me, it > seems it would make more sense for CloudBees to focus on improving overall > review disciple in whole jenkinsci organization. I would be much happier with > @reviewbyjenkinscore, and I am fine considering all bees Jenkins core > contributors for reviewing purposes.
We have mandatory pull requests and reviews to improve the quality of CloudBees contributions to the Jenkins community. I think this is pretty straightforward. Regarding other developers' changes -- the Jenkins project has always been pretty permissive in what contributions it accepts, how plugin maintainership is handled, etc. This is well documented: https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Governance+Document#GovernanceDocument-Lowerbarrierofentry And while I've always had some reservations regarding 'ask and ye shall receive push access', this is (mostly) how the Jenkins project operates. As plugin maintainer, you get to decide how you develop. Any changes to this would need to go through the governance meeting and board and that's not a goal we have. It would be great if we could manage to get some volunteers to review pull requests across the entire jenkinsci organization. But that's a different topic altogether. Feel free to contact me if you have some ideas about this. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/D79F7AD0-548F-46EE-92C9-EF50987E1076%40beckweb.net. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
