You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@perl.apache.org by "Philip M. Gollucci" <pg...@p6m7g8.com> on 2010/04/16 05:42:28 UTC
lets not forget we are a CTR PMC
Thats Commit Then Review. Its a VC we can always revert things.
The RTC (Review Then Committ) suggestion is only for new committers
while they get acclimated. Unless its some massive architectural change
which will probably be prose explanation anyway.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1024D/DB9B8C1C B90B FBC3 A3A1 C71A 8E70 3F8C 75B8 8FFB DB9B 8C1C
Philip M. Gollucci (pgollucci@p6m7g8.com) c: 703.336.9354
VP Apache Infrastructure; Member, Apache Software Foundation
Committer, FreeBSD Foundation
Consultant, P6M7G8 Inc.
Sr. System Admin, Ridecharge Inc.
Work like you don't need the money,
love like you'll never get hurt,
and dance like nobody's watching.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: lets not forget we are a CTR PMC
Posted by "Philippe M. Chiasson" <go...@ectoplasm.org>.
On 10-04-16 15:01 , Fred Moyer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
> <pg...@p6m7g8.com> wrote:
>> Thats Commit Then Review. Its a VC we can always revert things.
>
> True, but I think that reverting things rarely (if ever) happens.
>
>> The RTC (Review Then Committ) suggestion is only for new committers while
>> they get acclimated. Unless its some massive architectural change which will
>> probably be prose explanation anyway.
>
> I think this is still worthwhile even for veteran committers (note
> that I'm not one of those!). Once code is committed, I think there is
> less motivation to review it, but that's just my opinion.
Yes, but there is nothing wrong with asking for a few set of eyeballs to
have a look at code before checking it in.
I am very comfortable complaining or reverting what I think is bad code
getting checked in. OTOH, if you want to post patches and ask for review
*before* you commit, I don't mind at all.
I think it's a matter of coder's confidence in the code in question.
But yeah, it's good to clarify that if you got a commit bit, you don't
*need* to wait for +1s, review, or anything else before landing changes.
--
Philippe M. Chiasson GPG: F9BFE0C2480E7680 1AE53631CB32A107 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/
Re: lets not forget we are a CTR PMC
Posted by Fred Moyer <fr...@redhotpenguin.com>.
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Philip M. Gollucci
<pg...@p6m7g8.com> wrote:
> Thats Commit Then Review. Its a VC we can always revert things.
True, but I think that reverting things rarely (if ever) happens.
> The RTC (Review Then Committ) suggestion is only for new committers while
> they get acclimated. Unless its some massive architectural change which will
> probably be prose explanation anyway.
I think this is still worthwhile even for veteran committers (note
that I'm not one of those!). Once code is committed, I think there is
less motivation to review it, but that's just my opinion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org