chukwa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ariel Rabkin <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Applying commit-then-review
Date Tue, 21 Sep 2010 20:50:27 GMT
My sense is that there's virtually never feedback on patches prior to commit.
There is, however, often feedback on design choices before the patch is posted.

I assume even with commit-then-review there would still be review for
major change proposals before implementation.


On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:55 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
<> wrote:
> On 9/13/2010 2:58 PM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> Hi,
>> If I understand correctly, Chukwa is following the review-then-commit
>> (RTC) pattern: Before every commit, a patch gets posted to a JIRA and
>> only on positive feedback it is committed.
>> As far as I can see, this is inherited from Hadoop's policies.
>> However, most projects at the ASF apply commit-then-review (CTR). CTR
>> has the advantage of being more agile, requiring less work (creating
>> issue, patch file, attaching it, waiting for feedback etc.) while
>> providing full oversight:
>> Every commit is reviewed by other committers after it happened, can be
>> discussed, reverted, improved etc. as a 'work in progress'.
>> It is best practice in CTR-mode to selectively use RTC, e.g. for big
>> patches or for potentially delicate commits.
>> I think Chukwa would profit from changing to CTR, so I'd like to know
>> what you think about it.
> The only useful question is what % of the jira tickets are rejected, or
> corrected, prior to commit?  If this number is very low, I'd suggest that
> waiting for jira feedback before committing is a waste.  As this number
> grows larger, the amount of work undone in trunk becomes more onerous
> than the review of open jira tickets.

Ari Rabkin
UC Berkeley Computer Science Department

View raw message