Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> HBASE-7088 ready to commit ;)


Copy link to this message
-
Re: HBASE-7088 ready to commit ;)
Also let me clarify something: A while back we discussed the Hadoop policy
of requiring 3 +1s for a branch merge. That sounds reasonable to me. I
don't see this in the current online manual text.
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Eh, that must have been discussed when I wasn't there or on the phone and
> unable to hear clearly. I'm not in favor of that policy as stated.
> Ownership isn't working out as far as I can see. Owners are not around
> enough. In fact I would say many people are relatively absent from the
> community for long stretches of time. That's fine, this is a volunteer
> society. We can't gate on an owner +1. I am not in favor of requiring more
> than one +1 except for the obvious case where a committer should not +1 and
> commit their own work. I am in favor of continuing our informal policy of
> CTR for trivial changes.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Here is what we decided as 'policy' on +1s:
>>
>> http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#decisions
>>
>> At our last meetup, we talked of upping the commit friction some to give
>> chance for more review before commit but this suggestion did not progress
>> beyond discussion.
>>
>> St.Ack
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > AFAIK, we just don't want a committer to +1 their own work.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > No
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
>> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Don't we need 2 commiters  +1 per JIRA?
>> > >>  Le 2013-12-18 18:23, "Andrew Purtell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a
>> écrit :
>> > >>
>> > >> > Why is one +1 not good enough for commit?
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:38 PM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > I gave +1 already
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Waiting for an extra +1
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
>> > >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > > It's small and there for a while.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Thanks.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > --
>> > >> > Best regards,
>> > >> >
>> > >> >    - Andy
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>> > Hein
>> > >> > (via Tom White)
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Best regards,
>> > >
>> > >    - Andy
>> > >
>> > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>> Hein
>> > > (via Tom White)
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> >    - Andy
>> >
>> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> > (via Tom White)
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
>    - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>

--
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)