You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bigtop.apache.org by Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com> on 2011/08/08 19:06:36 UTC
[VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Hey all -
I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
A.
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>.
Yes, the vote is closed. I'll start another vote on the details of the RTC
process tomorrow.
A.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Bruno Mahé <bm...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 08/08/2011 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> > Hey all -
> >
> > I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit
> (R-T-C)
> > or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
> > hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
> > http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
> >
> > A.
> >
>
> Is the vote closed?
>
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Bruno Mahé <bm...@apache.org>.
On 08/08/2011 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> Hey all -
>
> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
>
> A.
>
Is the vote closed?
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Peter Linnell` <pl...@cloudera.com>.
On 08/08/2011 03:26 PM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> Also, fwiw, I'm +1 on C-T-R. I personally think R-T-C has a place on a more
> mature project that needs to care more about controlling what gets in than
> embracing potential new committers, but I think we're not yet at the stage
> where we really need what R-T-C provides. I believe the increased velocity
> of C-T-R can be a big help to a project, especially one this early in its
> lifespan.
>
> A.
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Andrew Bayer<an...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I should mention that this vote isn't specifying how many +1s would be
>> needed, how long the vote period would be, etc. I think we should first
>> decide which overall philosophy we want to go with, and then the
>> implementation details of what we choose.
>>
>> A.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer<an...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hey all -
>>>
>>> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
>>> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
>>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
>>> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
>>>
>>> A.
>>>
>>
>>
>
At this point I'd vote +1 for CTR. Once we bootstrap Bigtop into a
larger project, then we could revisit this. I think the priority is
getting past the bootstrap stage.
Peter
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>.
Also, fwiw, I'm +1 on C-T-R. I personally think R-T-C has a place on a more
mature project that needs to care more about controlling what gets in than
embracing potential new committers, but I think we're not yet at the stage
where we really need what R-T-C provides. I believe the increased velocity
of C-T-R can be a big help to a project, especially one this early in its
lifespan.
A.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I should mention that this vote isn't specifying how many +1s would be
> needed, how long the vote period would be, etc. I think we should first
> decide which overall philosophy we want to go with, and then the
> implementation details of what we choose.
>
> A.
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hey all -
>>
>> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
>> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
>> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
>>
>> A.
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>.
I should mention that this vote isn't specifying how many +1s would be
needed, how long the vote period would be, etc. I think we should first
decide which overall philosophy we want to go with, and then the
implementation details of what we choose.
A.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hey all -
>
> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
>
> A.
>
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com>.
Alright, including James' email to me directly, that's 2 for CTR and 3 for
RTC, so RTC it is!
A.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Eli Collins <el...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Note that in both CTR and RTC there is code review, the decision is
> whether the commit can come first.
>
> My suggestion would be RTC, and if that's moving slowly than move to
> CTR, perhaps have a 1 day timeout. But I don't feel strongly either
> way.
>
> IMO the most important thing is to devote review bandwidth to new
> contributors so we can grow the project.
>
> Thanks,
> Eli
>
> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Bruno Mahé <bm...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 08/08/2011 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> >> Hey all -
> >>
> >> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit
> (R-T-C)
> >> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
> >> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
> >> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
> >> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
> >>
> >> A.
> >>
> >
> > I vote +1 for R-T-C.
> > We are far from being behind the number of patches to review, and so far
> > I believe most of them, if not all, have been reviewed within a day.
> > Given these packages are meant to work across a wide variety of
> > distributions, it is very easy to let some bugs slip through and break
> > bigtop for some GNU/Linux distributions. Furthermore we don't have any
> > job set up on jenkins to confirm whether a patch break something or not.
> > And even if we do get some slaves by 0.0.1 or 0.0.2, there will not be
> > as much coverage as there should be.
> > So I would welcome some extra pairs of eyeballs on patches.
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Eli Collins <el...@cloudera.com>.
Note that in both CTR and RTC there is code review, the decision is
whether the commit can come first.
My suggestion would be RTC, and if that's moving slowly than move to
CTR, perhaps have a 1 day timeout. But I don't feel strongly either
way.
IMO the most important thing is to devote review bandwidth to new
contributors so we can grow the project.
Thanks,
Eli
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Bruno Mahé <bm...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 08/08/2011 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
>> Hey all -
>>
>> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
>> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
>> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
>>
>> A.
>>
>
> I vote +1 for R-T-C.
> We are far from being behind the number of patches to review, and so far
> I believe most of them, if not all, have been reviewed within a day.
> Given these packages are meant to work across a wide variety of
> distributions, it is very easy to let some bugs slip through and break
> bigtop for some GNU/Linux distributions. Furthermore we don't have any
> job set up on jenkins to confirm whether a patch break something or not.
> And even if we do get some slaves by 0.0.1 or 0.0.2, there will not be
> as much coverage as there should be.
> So I would welcome some extra pairs of eyeballs on patches.
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Bruno Mahé <bm...@apache.org>.
On 08/08/2011 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer wrote:
> Hey all -
>
> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
>
> A.
>
I vote +1 for R-T-C.
We are far from being behind the number of patches to review, and so far
I believe most of them, if not all, have been reviewed within a day.
Given these packages are meant to work across a wide variety of
distributions, it is very easy to let some bugs slip through and break
bigtop for some GNU/Linux distributions. Furthermore we don't have any
job set up on jenkins to confirm whether a patch break something or not.
And even if we do get some slaves by 0.0.1 or 0.0.2, there will not be
as much coverage as there should be.
So I would welcome some extra pairs of eyeballs on patches.
Re: [VOTE] Review then commit, or commit then review
Posted by Andrei Savu <sa...@gmail.com>.
+1 for review-then-commit
I think it provides a good balance of speed and code quality plus
there are many initial committers so it should not take too long for a
patch to get a review.
-- Andrei Savu / andreisavu.ro
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Andrew Bayer <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all -
>
> I'm calling a vote on whether we should go with review then commit (R-T-C)
> or commit then review (C-T-R). See definitions at
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html. The vote's open for 72
> hours, and is open to anyone on the committers or mentors list at
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/bigtop.html. Thanks!
>
> A.
>