Re: svn commit: r233106 - /forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml

[Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>]

On 8/16/05, crossley@apache.org <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> Author: crossley
> Date: Tue Aug 16 19:15:58 2005
> New Revision: 233106
> 
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=233106&view=rev
> Log:
> Clarify what we mean by commit-then-review.
> 
> Modified:
>     forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml
> 
> Modified: forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml?rev=233106&r1=233105&r2=233106&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml (original)
> +++ forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml Tue Aug 16 19:15:58 2005
> @@ -504,7 +504,13 @@
>    <section id="code">
>      <title>Code management</title>
>      <p>
> -    <link href="http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#CommitThenReview">Commit-then-review</link>.
> +      We use the
> +      <link href="http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#CommitThenReview">Commit-then-review</link>
> +      method. This basically means that committers conduct a very minor
> +      review of each patch, looking for major issues such as licensing
> +      issues and obvious things that would break the build of trunk.
> +      Otherwise they would add the patch as-is, then everyone will
> +      review the changes.
>      </p>
>    </section>

This may be a nit-picky question, but this description isn't very
clear.  It would seem that the "code management" has a different
description for committers than devs providing patches.  In general,
for committers, it's full CTR -- changes are committed, then lazily
reviewed by other devs.

For devs submitting patches, it's more of a RCTR (Review Comit Then
Review) process.  Or at least some committers are [fortunately]
providing this pre-cursor review.  I may be the only one not clear on
your words though...
--tim

Re: svn commit: r233106 - /forrest/trunk/site-author/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml

[David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>]

Tim Williams wrote:
> > Author: crossley
> > +      We use the
> > +      <link href="http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#CommitThenReview">Commit-then-review</link>
> > +      method. This basically means that committers conduct a very minor
> > +      review of each patch, looking for major issues such as licensing
> > +      issues and obvious things that would break the build of trunk.
> > +      Otherwise they would add the patch as-is, then everyone will
> > +      review the changes.
> >      </p>
> >    </section>
> 
> This may be a nit-picky question, but this description isn't very
> clear.  It would seem that the "code management" has a different
> description for committers than devs providing patches.  In general,
> for committers, it's full CTR -- changes are committed, then lazily
> reviewed by other devs.
> 
> For devs submitting patches, it's more of a RCTR (Review Comit Then
> Review) process.  Or at least some committers are [fortunately]
> providing this pre-cursor review.  I may be the only one not clear on
> your words though...

You are correct - the clarification needs clarification.
I have spent today making another attempt.

Actually i have introduced confusion with the above change.
The term "review-then-commit" is a method for decision-making
rather than a prescription for how a committer should operate.

Anyway, i will try to get the new version committed today.

-David