On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 11:59:52PM -0400, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Niels de Vos" <[email protected]> > > To: "Raghavendra Gowdappa" <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected] > > Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 11:23:14 AM > > Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] Time Window before merging the patch > > > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 01:09:35AM -0400, Raghavendra Gowdappa wrote: > > > All, > > > > > > There have been concerns about merging the changes too fast without > > > giving others time to review. To address the same I'll try to give a > > > buffer window of a day or two after a patch has been scored +1/+2 by > > > me. > > > > I am not sure what the concerns are, and if those would apply to other > > components/maintainers as well? As long as you are not the author of the > > change, and merge them without a review of an expert in the domain, > > there should not be any issues when merging patches immediately after > > review/testing. > > Team members working on the components I maintain felt that they need > some window after I ack. Though I didn't see much value in the > argument itself (as the patch would be present on gerrit even before I > ack it), I felt that there is no harm in providing a window. If it > brings more participation in reviewing the patches, I am fine with > this adjustment. > > As to whether it applies to other components, it depends on the needs > of team primarily working on components you are maintaining.
Ok, thanks for the additional explaining. For the components I work on with others, I recommend them to configure email notifications in Gerrit. That way they will be the first to know that a new patch has been posted and they can review immediately. This configuration is documented in the maintainers guide: http://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Contributors-Guide/Guidelines-For-Maintainers/#patches-in-gerrit Maybe we should more strongly encourage configuring this for anyone that sends the regular patches for components. HTH, Niels > > > > > For most changes, we should know if it can affect other components or > > xlators. I think most of us would add the maintainers on the review that > > need to care and wait/poke them for a review. > > > > Could you explain a little more about the concerns that were raised? > > > > Thanks! > > Niels > >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
