[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Change to Subversion PMC rule for approving backports

From: Julian Foad <julian_at_foad.me.uk>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 07:15:01 +0000 (UTC)

Fri Sep 06 07:14:56 GMT+01:00 2019 Branko Čibej :
 
> On 06.09.2019 07:49, Julian Foad wrote:
> >
> > Bert Huijben wrote:
> >> Why just one +1?
> >> I like the second eye rule we currently have, so one +1 from the nominator and one additional eye.
> >> For bindings we have +- the same rule, but one of the eyes can be someone else than a full committer. (Not sure if we still have any active partial committers though)
> >>
> >> As always, feel free to ping me if you need an additional review for something. I don't follow the dev@ list on a daily basis any more :(
> >>
> >> +1 on reducing the number of required votes to just 2 +1s.
> >
> > The thing is, every trunk change goes in to the next regular release, and the next LTS release, anyway with no extra eyes required.
>
> Well that's not really true, is it. You're assuming that people don't
> read commit logs.
 
I'm referring to "extra eyes" in the sense of deliberate, requested, and recorded. Commit review is already possible anyway.
 
> And I think you're oversimplifying things a bit
> because ...
>
> > If certain changes should have more review, we should be managing that on trunk.
>
> ... there's a crucial difference here: we're allowed to make changes on
> trunk that are forbidden on release branches. That was always the reason
> for having an extra review step for backports.
 
That's a true distinction.

Sent with FairEmail [https://email.faircode.eu/] , an open source, privacy friendly email app for Android
Received on 2019-09-06 09:15:20 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.