You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bigtop.apache.org by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org> on 2015/11/17 03:31:09 UTC
Re: two months since Bigtop started on CTR path
Next week will be two months since we pushed BIGTOP-2069 introducing a trial
period of the project's CTR development model. I am happy to say that we
haven't broke the project ;) And now with the new better working CI the
chances of it are even slimmer, IMO. Once we have an automatic deployment and
testing, we'll be even in the better shape.
Hence, I'd like to revisit the conversation from September and gauge the
consensus of CTR model to become permanent?
Thoughts?
Cos
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 05:01PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> Looks like we have the lazy consensus on this. Let's move forward with
> two-months trial, conditional on CI being recovered after the current issues
> with disk space getting filled quickly. So, I presume we'll start after the
> ApacheCon EU.
>
> I propose the following work-flow for CTR and document it in the top-level
> README. Here's the patch:
>
> diff --git README.md README.md
> index 6342f92..23062a6 100644
> --- README.md
> +++ README.md
> @@ -55,6 +55,27 @@ There are lots of ways to contribute. People with different expertise can help
>
> Also, opening [JIRA's](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP) and getting started by posting on the mailing list is helpful.
>
> +CTR model trial
> +===============
> +
> +As discussed on the dev@ list (http://bit.ly/1gLeArc) we are going into a trial
> +period of CTR model for Bigtop project. The trial will go into effect until
> +Dec, 5th, 2015 or for two months since the master CI disk space issues are resolve,
> +whichever comes first. The following rules will be used for the CTR process:
> + * a committer can go ahead and commit the patch without mandatory review if
> + felt confident in its quality (e.g. reasonable testing has been done
> + locally; all compilations pass; RAT check is passed; the patch follows
> + coding guidelines)
> + * a committer is encouraged to seek peer-review and/or advice before hand if
> + there're doubts in the approach taken, design decision, or implementation
> + details
> + * a committer should keep an eye on the official CI builds at
> + http://ci.bigtop.apache.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/ (Docker-Bigtop-*
> + builds) to make sure that committed changes haven't break anything. In
> + which case the committer should take a timely effort to resolve the issues
> + and unblock the others in the community
> + * there's no changes in the JIRA process, except as specified above
> +
> What do people use Apache Bigtop for?
> ==============================
>
> ---- end of the patch
>
> If the above looks ok for everybody I will go ahead and commit this in a couple
> of days, once I regain the network connection.
>
> Regards,
> Cos
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 03:23AM, Evans Ye wrote:
> > Ofcourse if that doesnt fit we can roll back to RTC :)
> > 2015年9月20日 上午3:20於 "Evans Ye" <ev...@apache.org>寫道：
> >
> > > This is way better than mine!
> > > With practical use & try we can have concrete idea of how CTR works in our
> > > community. We can develop our policy to handle real world cases instead of
> > > just imaging it.
> > > 2015年9月20日 上午3:11於 "Konstantin Boudnik" <co...@apache.org>寫道：
> > >
> > >> I'd rather avoid or at least postpone the voting until we have everyone
> > >> being
> > >> comfortable with the proposed changed. I really don't like an idea of
> > >> someone
> > >> being in minority and being forced to play alone. On the other hand, I
> > >> see a
> > >> bunch of situations where CTR would be beneficial e.g BIGTOP-2057.
> > >>
> > >> If as Evans said all questions were answered, let's proceed to voting. If
> > >> not
> > >> - let's give CTR a try for say a couple of months and see how it works for
> > >> everybody. We hardly can do any irreversible harm even if we try - we can
> > >> always revert anything we don't like ;)
> > >>
> > >> Cos
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 01:52AM, Evans Ye wrote:
> > >> > To summarise this discussing thread, I think we have most of our team
> > >> > member supporting CTR model and questions from RTC advocates are
> > >> answered.
> > >> > I propose to start a vote to officially made decision wether or not to
> > >> > switch to CTR.
> > >> > If that passed, we then start drafting our CTR policy through
> > >> discussion.
> > >> > Any other thoughts?
> > >> >
> > >> > 2015-09-18 2:50 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Can I ask RTC advocate to review a couple of patches to unblock me?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > BIGTOP-2025
> > >> > > BIGTOP-2051
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thank you very much!
> > >> > > Cos
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:32AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:35PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote:
> > >> > > > > Sorry, I haven't followed the initial discussion since I was not
> > >> > > onboard at that time.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > From my view bigtop is the fastest moving project, I ever knew. I
> > >> am
> > >> > > active
> > >> > > > > for over 20 years in all kinds of opensource projects, but bigtops
> > >> > > tops them
> > >> > > > > all in speed, second fastest maybe samba and linux kernel at 0.0x
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > That's so good to hear! Made my day, if not the whole week! Speaks
> > >> tons
> > >> > > about
> > >> > > > the community we have on this project!
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > I am strongly oppose [i.e. -1] the CTR style, since I think the
> > >> > > project --
> > >> > > > > and myself -- take large benefits from discussions about
> > >> implementing
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > best solution for the project.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I think CTR doesn't mean that one can not ever ask for a code review
> > >> > > upfront.
> > >> > > > It's all about trusting the developers to do what's the best for the
> > >> > > project
> > >> > > > without hanging out high and dry in some obvious cases.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > Getting a +1 is not only that a patch simply runs, it is about
> > >> code
> > >> > > style,
> > >> > > > > architectural decisions. Even a one-liner patch can break
> > >> designs.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > And that again falls back to the point of trusting the judgement of
> > >> your
> > >> > > peers
> > >> > > > to do the "right thing" and come forward with the discussion before
> > >> > > making the
> > >> > > > changes that are questionable or contraversial. And we won't know
> > >> if it
> > >> > > works
> > >> > > > before we try it at least for some time ;)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Cos
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > I think a clear review guideline would help bigtop more that a
> > >> commit
> > >> > > > > policy change.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Olaf
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> > >
Re: two months since Bigtop started on CTR path
Posted by RJ Nowling <rn...@gmail.com>.
+1 from me, too.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
> Seemingly we have a consensus here, but this is a policy change, so I will
> start an official [VOTE] to wrap it up. Thanks!
>
> Cos
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:19PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Seems I haven't broken too much ;-) +1 from me, too.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Olaf
> >
> >
> > > Am 17.11.2015 um 17:19 schrieb Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org
> >:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >> What I find real good about this experiment is that we don't see any
> abuse of
> > >> this policy. Committers are actively seeking the feedback if they
> feel a need
> > >> to have a discussion about the implementation. Which is one of the
> most common
> > >> objections to the model.
> > >
> > > +1 to that!
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> >
>
>
>
Re: two months since Bigtop started on CTR path
Posted by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
Seemingly we have a consensus here, but this is a policy change, so I will
start an official [VOTE] to wrap it up. Thanks!
Cos
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:19PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Seems I haven't broken too much ;-) +1 from me, too.
>
> Thanks.
> Olaf
>
>
> > Am 17.11.2015 um 17:19 schrieb Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> What I find real good about this experiment is that we don't see any abuse of
> >> this policy. Committers are actively seeking the feedback if they feel a need
> >> to have a discussion about the implementation. Which is one of the most common
> >> objections to the model.
> >
> > +1 to that!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
>
Re: two months since Bigtop started on CTR path
Posted by Olaf Flebbe <of...@oflebbe.de>.
Hi,
Seems I haven't broken too much ;-) +1 from me, too.
Thanks.
Olaf
> Am 17.11.2015 um 17:19 schrieb Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>:
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
>> What I find real good about this experiment is that we don't see any abuse of
>> this policy. Committers are actively seeking the feedback if they feel a need
>> to have a discussion about the implementation. Which is one of the most common
>> objections to the model.
>
> +1 to that!
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
Re: two months since Bigtop started on CTR path
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
> What I find real good about this experiment is that we don't see any abuse of
> this policy. Committers are actively seeking the feedback if they feel a need
> to have a discussion about the implementation. Which is one of the most common
> objections to the model.
+1 to that!
Thanks,
Roman.
Re: two months since Bigtop started on CTR path
Posted by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
What I find real good about this experiment is that we don't see any abuse of
this policy. Committers are actively seeking the feedback if they feel a need
to have a discussion about the implementation. Which is one of the most common
objections to the model.
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 02:06PM, Evans Ye wrote:
> It seems things are going pretty well under CTR:
> * Committers are more productive
> * Nothing went wrong seriously
> * Concern on patches are addressed
>
> So I'm +1 to make CTR model permanent.
>
> 2015-11-17 10:31 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>:
>
> > Next week will be two months since we pushed BIGTOP-2069 introducing a
> > trial
> > period of the project's CTR development model. I am happy to say that we
> > haven't broke the project ;) And now with the new better working CI the
> > chances of it are even slimmer, IMO. Once we have an automatic deployment
> > and
> > testing, we'll be even in the better shape.
> >
> > Hence, I'd like to revisit the conversation from September and gauge the
> > consensus of CTR model to become permanent?
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > Cos
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 05:01PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > > Looks like we have the lazy consensus on this. Let's move forward with
> > > two-months trial, conditional on CI being recovered after the current
> > issues
> > > with disk space getting filled quickly. So, I presume we'll start after
> > the
> > > ApacheCon EU.
> > >
> > > I propose the following work-flow for CTR and document it in the
> > top-level
> > > README. Here's the patch:
> > >
> > > diff --git README.md README.md
> > > index 6342f92..23062a6 100644
> > > --- README.md
> > > +++ README.md
> > > @@ -55,6 +55,27 @@ There are lots of ways to contribute. People with
> > different expertise can help
> > >
> > > Also, opening [JIRA's](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP)
> > and getting started by posting on the mailing list is helpful.
> > >
> > > +CTR model trial
> > > +===============
> > > +
> > > +As discussed on the dev@ list (http://bit.ly/1gLeArc) we are going
> > into a trial
> > > +period of CTR model for Bigtop project. The trial will go into effect
> > until
> > > +Dec, 5th, 2015 or for two months since the master CI disk space issues
> > are resolve,
> > > +whichever comes first. The following rules will be used for the CTR
> > process:
> > > + * a committer can go ahead and commit the patch without mandatory
> > review if
> > > + felt confident in its quality (e.g. reasonable testing has been done
> > > + locally; all compilations pass; RAT check is passed; the patch
> > follows
> > > + coding guidelines)
> > > + * a committer is encouraged to seek peer-review and/or advice before
> > hand if
> > > + there're doubts in the approach taken, design decision, or
> > implementation
> > > + details
> > > + * a committer should keep an eye on the official CI builds at
> > > + http://ci.bigtop.apache.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/
> > (Docker-Bigtop-*
> > > + builds) to make sure that committed changes haven't break anything.
> > In
> > > + which case the committer should take a timely effort to resolve the
> > issues
> > > + and unblock the others in the community
> > > + * there's no changes in the JIRA process, except as specified above
> > > +
> > > What do people use Apache Bigtop for?
> > > ==============================
> > >
> > > ---- end of the patch
> > >
> > > If the above looks ok for everybody I will go ahead and commit this in a
> > couple
> > > of days, once I regain the network connection.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Cos
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 03:23AM, Evans Ye wrote:
> > > > Ofcourse if that doesnt fit we can roll back to RTC :)
> > > > 2015年9月20日 上午3:20於 "Evans Ye" <ev...@apache.org>寫道：
> > > >
> > > > > This is way better than mine!
> > > > > With practical use & try we can have concrete idea of how CTR works
> > in our
> > > > > community. We can develop our policy to handle real world cases
> > instead of
> > > > > just imaging it.
> > > > > 2015年9月20日 上午3:11於 "Konstantin Boudnik" <co...@apache.org>寫道：
> > > > >
> > > > >> I'd rather avoid or at least postpone the voting until we have
> > everyone
> > > > >> being
> > > > >> comfortable with the proposed changed. I really don't like an idea
> > of
> > > > >> someone
> > > > >> being in minority and being forced to play alone. On the other
> > hand, I
> > > > >> see a
> > > > >> bunch of situations where CTR would be beneficial e.g BIGTOP-2057.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> If as Evans said all questions were answered, let's proceed to
> > voting. If
> > > > >> not
> > > > >> - let's give CTR a try for say a couple of months and see how it
> > works for
> > > > >> everybody. We hardly can do any irreversible harm even if we try -
> > we can
> > > > >> always revert anything we don't like ;)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Cos
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 01:52AM, Evans Ye wrote:
> > > > >> > To summarise this discussing thread, I think we have most of our
> > team
> > > > >> > member supporting CTR model and questions from RTC advocates are
> > > > >> answered.
> > > > >> > I propose to start a vote to officially made decision wether or
> > not to
> > > > >> > switch to CTR.
> > > > >> > If that passed, we then start drafting our CTR policy through
> > > > >> discussion.
> > > > >> > Any other thoughts?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > 2015-09-18 2:50 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > Can I ask RTC advocate to review a couple of patches to unblock
> > me?
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > BIGTOP-2025
> > > > >> > > BIGTOP-2051
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Thank you very much!
> > > > >> > > Cos
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:32AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:35PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > Sorry, I haven't followed the initial discussion since I
> > was not
> > > > >> > > onboard at that time.
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > From my view bigtop is the fastest moving project, I ever
> > knew. I
> > > > >> am
> > > > >> > > active
> > > > >> > > > > for over 20 years in all kinds of opensource projects, but
> > bigtops
> > > > >> > > tops them
> > > > >> > > > > all in speed, second fastest maybe samba and linux kernel
> > at 0.0x
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > That's so good to hear! Made my day, if not the whole week!
> > Speaks
> > > > >> tons
> > > > >> > > about
> > > > >> > > > the community we have on this project!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > > I am strongly oppose [i.e. -1] the CTR style, since I think
> > the
> > > > >> > > project --
> > > > >> > > > > and myself -- take large benefits from discussions about
> > > > >> implementing
> > > > >> > > the
> > > > >> > > > > best solution for the project.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > I think CTR doesn't mean that one can not ever ask for a code
> > review
> > > > >> > > upfront.
> > > > >> > > > It's all about trusting the developers to do what's the best
> > for the
> > > > >> > > project
> > > > >> > > > without hanging out high and dry in some obvious cases.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Getting a +1 is not only that a patch simply runs, it is
> > about
> > > > >> code
> > > > >> > > style,
> > > > >> > > > > architectural decisions. Even a one-liner patch can break
> > > > >> designs.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > And that again falls back to the point of trusting the
> > judgement of
> > > > >> your
> > > > >> > > peers
> > > > >> > > > to do the "right thing" and come forward with the discussion
> > before
> > > > >> > > making the
> > > > >> > > > changes that are questionable or contraversial. And we won't
> > know
> > > > >> if it
> > > > >> > > works
> > > > >> > > > before we try it at least for some time ;)
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Cos
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > > I think a clear review guideline would help bigtop more
> > that a
> > > > >> commit
> > > > >> > > > > policy change.
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Olaf
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> >
Re: two months since Bigtop started on CTR path
Posted by Evans Ye <ev...@apache.org>.
It seems things are going pretty well under CTR:
* Committers are more productive
* Nothing went wrong seriously
* Concern on patches are addressed
So I'm +1 to make CTR model permanent.
2015-11-17 10:31 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>:
> Next week will be two months since we pushed BIGTOP-2069 introducing a
> trial
> period of the project's CTR development model. I am happy to say that we
> haven't broke the project ;) And now with the new better working CI the
> chances of it are even slimmer, IMO. Once we have an automatic deployment
> and
> testing, we'll be even in the better shape.
>
> Hence, I'd like to revisit the conversation from September and gauge the
> consensus of CTR model to become permanent?
>
> Thoughts?
> Cos
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 05:01PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > Looks like we have the lazy consensus on this. Let's move forward with
> > two-months trial, conditional on CI being recovered after the current
> issues
> > with disk space getting filled quickly. So, I presume we'll start after
> the
> > ApacheCon EU.
> >
> > I propose the following work-flow for CTR and document it in the
> top-level
> > README. Here's the patch:
> >
> > diff --git README.md README.md
> > index 6342f92..23062a6 100644
> > --- README.md
> > +++ README.md
> > @@ -55,6 +55,27 @@ There are lots of ways to contribute. People with
> different expertise can help
> >
> > Also, opening [JIRA's](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP)
> and getting started by posting on the mailing list is helpful.
> >
> > +CTR model trial
> > +===============
> > +
> > +As discussed on the dev@ list (http://bit.ly/1gLeArc) we are going
> into a trial
> > +period of CTR model for Bigtop project. The trial will go into effect
> until
> > +Dec, 5th, 2015 or for two months since the master CI disk space issues
> are resolve,
> > +whichever comes first. The following rules will be used for the CTR
> process:
> > + * a committer can go ahead and commit the patch without mandatory
> review if
> > + felt confident in its quality (e.g. reasonable testing has been done
> > + locally; all compilations pass; RAT check is passed; the patch
> follows
> > + coding guidelines)
> > + * a committer is encouraged to seek peer-review and/or advice before
> hand if
> > + there're doubts in the approach taken, design decision, or
> implementation
> > + details
> > + * a committer should keep an eye on the official CI builds at
> > + http://ci.bigtop.apache.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/
> (Docker-Bigtop-*
> > + builds) to make sure that committed changes haven't break anything.
> In
> > + which case the committer should take a timely effort to resolve the
> issues
> > + and unblock the others in the community
> > + * there's no changes in the JIRA process, except as specified above
> > +
> > What do people use Apache Bigtop for?
> > ==============================
> >
> > ---- end of the patch
> >
> > If the above looks ok for everybody I will go ahead and commit this in a
> couple
> > of days, once I regain the network connection.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Cos
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 03:23AM, Evans Ye wrote:
> > > Ofcourse if that doesnt fit we can roll back to RTC :)
> > > 2015年9月20日 上午3:20於 "Evans Ye" <ev...@apache.org>寫道：
> > >
> > > > This is way better than mine!
> > > > With practical use & try we can have concrete idea of how CTR works
> in our
> > > > community. We can develop our policy to handle real world cases
> instead of
> > > > just imaging it.
> > > > 2015年9月20日 上午3:11於 "Konstantin Boudnik" <co...@apache.org>寫道：
> > > >
> > > >> I'd rather avoid or at least postpone the voting until we have
> everyone
> > > >> being
> > > >> comfortable with the proposed changed. I really don't like an idea
> of
> > > >> someone
> > > >> being in minority and being forced to play alone. On the other
> hand, I
> > > >> see a
> > > >> bunch of situations where CTR would be beneficial e.g BIGTOP-2057.
> > > >>
> > > >> If as Evans said all questions were answered, let's proceed to
> voting. If
> > > >> not
> > > >> - let's give CTR a try for say a couple of months and see how it
> works for
> > > >> everybody. We hardly can do any irreversible harm even if we try -
> we can
> > > >> always revert anything we don't like ;)
> > > >>
> > > >> Cos
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 01:52AM, Evans Ye wrote:
> > > >> > To summarise this discussing thread, I think we have most of our
> team
> > > >> > member supporting CTR model and questions from RTC advocates are
> > > >> answered.
> > > >> > I propose to start a vote to officially made decision wether or
> not to
> > > >> > switch to CTR.
> > > >> > If that passed, we then start drafting our CTR policy through
> > > >> discussion.
> > > >> > Any other thoughts?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 2015-09-18 2:50 GMT+08:00 Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Can I ask RTC advocate to review a couple of patches to unblock
> me?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > BIGTOP-2025
> > > >> > > BIGTOP-2051
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thank you very much!
> > > >> > > Cos
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:32AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 07:35PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote:
> > > >> > > > > Sorry, I haven't followed the initial discussion since I
> was not
> > > >> > > onboard at that time.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > From my view bigtop is the fastest moving project, I ever
> knew. I
> > > >> am
> > > >> > > active
> > > >> > > > > for over 20 years in all kinds of opensource projects, but
> bigtops
> > > >> > > tops them
> > > >> > > > > all in speed, second fastest maybe samba and linux kernel
> at 0.0x
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > That's so good to hear! Made my day, if not the whole week!
> Speaks
> > > >> tons
> > > >> > > about
> > > >> > > > the community we have on this project!
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > I am strongly oppose [i.e. -1] the CTR style, since I think
> the
> > > >> > > project --
> > > >> > > > > and myself -- take large benefits from discussions about
> > > >> implementing
> > > >> > > the
> > > >> > > > > best solution for the project.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I think CTR doesn't mean that one can not ever ask for a code
> review
> > > >> > > upfront.
> > > >> > > > It's all about trusting the developers to do what's the best
> for the
> > > >> > > project
> > > >> > > > without hanging out high and dry in some obvious cases.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > Getting a +1 is not only that a patch simply runs, it is
> about
> > > >> code
> > > >> > > style,
> > > >> > > > > architectural decisions. Even a one-liner patch can break
> > > >> designs.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > And that again falls back to the point of trusting the
> judgement of
> > > >> your
> > > >> > > peers
> > > >> > > > to do the "right thing" and come forward with the discussion
> before
> > > >> > > making the
> > > >> > > > changes that are questionable or contraversial. And we won't
> know
> > > >> if it
> > > >> > > works
> > > >> > > > before we try it at least for some time ;)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Cos
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > I think a clear review guideline would help bigtop more
> that a
> > > >> commit
> > > >> > > > > policy change.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Olaf
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >>
> > > >
>