ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anton Vinogradov <avinogra...@gridgain.com>
Subject Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process
Date Thu, 03 Mar 2016 17:24:59 GMT
+1 (but I hope it's still up to a committer to decide whether a change
should need a review or not.)

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> I hate to be religious about anything, but do think that for most of the
> functionality, RTC makes sense.
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Raul Kripalani <raulk@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I thought we were already on RTC process.
> >
> > What do you mean with contributors following this process?
> >
> > Raúl.
> > On 3 Mar 2016 11:54, "Denis Magda" <dmagda@gridgain.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > I would propose to switch back to review-then-commit process. This
> > process
> > > has to be followed by both contributors and committers.
> > >
> > > There is a reason for this I have in mind. Ignite is a complex platform
> > > with several big modules. Some of the people may be experts in module A
> > > while others in module B etc.
> > > If a committer, who is good in module A, makes changes in module B
> > merging
> > > the changes without a review this can break module's B internal
> > > functionality that the committer didn't take into account.
> > >
> > > My proposal is to introduce a list of maintainers for every Ignite
> module
> > > like it's done in Spark [1] and a rule that will require a committer to
> > get
> > > an approval from a module maintainer before merging changes.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Denis
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SPARK/Committers#Committers-ReviewProcessandMaintainers
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message