spot-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gonzalez, Victor" <victor.gonza...@intel.com>
Subject Re: [Proposal] PR voting process changes
Date Fri, 22 Sep 2017 15:15:27 GMT
+1 with 48 hours period

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 21, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Jon Zeolla <JonZeolla@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> I agree, at least one +1 from a committer as a minimum bar is pretty
> reasonable.  For bigger changes usually having more people review and test
> makes sense, but I've seen that handled as more of a one off.
> 
> I'm usually in favor of a 24 hour wait as well, but could see it go either
> way here.
> 
> Jon
> 
>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017, 16:44 <jarcec@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I would recommend to make contributing to Spot as easily as possible
>> because any hurdle or obstacle will make contributing harder and thus will
>> discourage potential long term contributors.
>> 
>> Pretty much all other projects that I’m involved with at ASF are following
>> something in the lines of what Nate is describing. Anyone on the internet
>> can submit a patch and all it takes is a single committer who does review
>> and then the patch is merged to master branch. Some projects do a “cool
>> off" window before the “review” and “merge” to make sure that other
>> committers have time to jump in - projects like Hadoop and Hive tend to
>> give 24 hours, projects like Sqoop or Flume simply commit immediately. Any
>> other committer however have always a chance to jump in and pretty much
>> VETO the patch — provided there is a good explanation for the push back.
>> 
>> Jarcec
>> 
>>> On Sep 21, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Michael Ridley <mridley@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Sounds like a good approach.  I'm all in favor of following a process
>> that
>>> works for other ASF projects.
>>> 
>>> Speaking of votes by committer, I think any vote would be recorded as
>>> binding or non-binding based on committer status.  I am not a committer
>> so
>>> I always make sure to mark mine as non-binding.
>>> 
>>> Michael
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Nate Smith <natedogs911@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Also,
>>>> 
>>>> As a point of consideration it's good to highlight that in such a
>> scenario
>>>> where a +1 is given and 48 hours to review prior to merge, any -1 should
>>>> reset the vote in my mind. Votes of such nature would have to be
>> restricted
>>>> to committers on the project.
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Nate Smith <nathanael@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> 
>>>>> From my own experience and also in talking directly with a few
>> committers
>>>>> to the project the requirement for three +1's from committers should
be
>>>>> reviewed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My understanding is that other projects in the ASF simply require one
>>>> vote
>>>>> and provide some time for review by others prior to merging (such as
a
>>>>> 24-48 hour period). However more emphasis is placed on refining code
in
>>>>> preparation for releases.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As it stands today we require at least three +1's before merge, and
>> there
>>>>> is no time requirement.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Since we are a growing community, and the goal is to develop more code
>>>>> contributors I think it is important to bring this up for review in
>> hopes
>>>>> that we can adopt something that allows faster iterations with a strong
>>>>> focus on polishing for future releases.
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Nathanael
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Michael Ridley <mridley@cloudera.com>
>>> office: (650) 352-1337
>>> mobile: (571) 438-2420
>>> Senior Solutions Architect
>>> Cloudera
>> 
>> --
> 
> Jon

Mime
View raw message