Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote on Thu, 29 Aug 2019 15:36 +00:00:
>> To all devs:
>> Proposal for a permanent change to our backport rules :
>> * For non-LTS releases, each backport nomination only requires one +1
>> vote (instead of three).
>> Specific diff to the text of :
>> - A change needs three +1 votes from full committers (or partial
>> committers for the involved areas), and no vetoes, to go into A.B.x.
>> + A change needs three +1 votes (for an LTS release line) or one +1 vote
>> (for a non-LTS release line) from full committers (or partial committers
>> for the involved areas), and no vetoes, to go into A.B.x.
>> - (If a change affects the build system, however, it is considered a
>> core change, and needs three +1's.)
>> + (If a change affects the build system, however, it is considered a
>> core change, and so for an LTS release line needs three +1's.)
> What do you propose to do about the rule that changes to tools/ or
> bindings/ require 1×+1 and 1×+0? It would be odd if changes to tools/
> required more votes than changes to core.
Good catch. Should require just one +1 vote (removing the additional +0
> I think that section as it stands (before your change) is pretty hard to
> follow: it jumps back and forth between different topics. I might take
> a shot at clarifying it (without semantic changes), if that won't
> conflict with patches you have in flight.
I strongly urge that we simplify any and all of our documentation at any
opportunity. Nearly all of it is much too long. It would be much better
to state the facts in a few bullet points, and move the discussion of
rationale and history to a dedicated subsection so readers just wanting
the facts can easily skip that part.
Received on 2019-08-30 10:40:42 CEST