Thank you to everyone who replied. Even though it sounds like there is not
complete consensus on some of the finer points, I think I have a clearer
understanding on how to participate now.
I do think posting all requirements in jira before calling the merge vote
makes the process more effective.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
Here's my take, FWIW. The entire project needs to determine whether
it is willing to take on the maintenance of code developed in a
branch. This vote needs the widest audience. On the other hand,
discussion on the
I agree with what Nicholas is saying.
Feature branch merge votes are similar to traditional review-commit process.
That means the code should be ready, and pass the Jenkins build tests.
Also similar to regular patches where one describes what changes the
patch brings, having an updated design
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Granted some of the feature readiness activity can be done during voting.
But I fail to understand why expediting a feature that takes months to build
should try to optimize a week. Why not finish the requirements we
It seems that overall the branch-merge voting threads are overloaded with
multiple goals.
Like other things that we vote on, a DISCUSS/PROPOSAL thread upfront for the
branch-merge should alleviate any concerns that any committer might have. Once
that is done, [VOTE] thread can simply be a
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
vino...@apache.org wrote:
Discussing on a voting thread is not productive.
When all votes are +1 then no discussion is needed. One shouldn't
call a vote unless one expects all votes to be +1. But, if
unexpectedly they're not all +1,
I've realized that I'm very confused about the purpose and the process of
merge votes. I'd like to use this thread for clarification so that we all
know exactly what our votes on a merge thread mean. It's possible that
we'll even want to reconsider whether or not merge vote threads are useful.
Hi Aaron,
Thanks for pointing this out. I hadn't seen it, but I just caught up.
This proposal states that 3 binding +1 votes are required for a branch
merge, which makes sense to me. My confusion arises from the fact that
I've seen the voting happening in 2 different places in 2 different ways
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Chris Nauroth cnaur...@hortonworks.com wrote:
When the voting happens on jira with a finalized merge patch, I know
exactly what I'm voting for, because it's the same review-and-commit
process that we follow every day with the extra requirement of 3 +1s. When
(Resend)
No. In the past, committers would merge a branch once the merge vote had been
passed even there were problems in the branch. Below is my understanding of
merge vote.
Feature branch merge votes is the same as the traditional code review-commit
process except that it requires three
10 matches
Mail list logo
