incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)
Date Wed, 18 Nov 2015 14:24:48 GMT
Le 18/11/15 14:34, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> On Wednesday 18 November 2015, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecharny@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Le 18/11/15 11:31, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
>>> I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss the 72h
>>> lazy consensus voting (with an assumed +1 absence any votes cast) that
>> most
>>> CTR projects operate under... and thus it can also be very easy to miss
>> the
>>> fact that there are reviews going on (and I am being generous here, I
>>> suspect that a lot of CTR commits are only reviewed within the 72h by a
>>> blind man on a galloping horse)
>> I'm not sure why you are correlating commit reviews and a 72h vote...
>> They are two really different things.
>
> When I last read up my understanding is that CTR operates as if there is a
> vote for each commit.

http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html :

*Commit-Then-Review*<http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#CommitThenReview>
    (Often abbreviated 'CTR' or 'C-T-R'.) A policy governing code
    changes which permits developers to make changes at will, with the
    possibility of being retroactively vetoed
    <http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#Veto>. C-T-R is an
    application of decision making through lazy consensus
    <http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus>. The
    C-T-R model is useful in rapid-prototyping environments, but because
    of the lack of mandatory review it may permit more bugs through in
    daily practice than the R-T-C
    <http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ReviewThenCommit>
    alternative.

The important piece here is '...the lack of mandatory review...'



>  It's a really lazy vote though as the vote passes if
> nobody comments on the commit after 72h... And personally I do not see much
> value in post-hoc votes... What are we going to do, rewrite history? But as
> I understand the "vote" is so that the code in source control can be
> covered by the legal umbrella despite it being outside of a formal source
> release.

AFAIU, it means it's very much a C[-T-R] and not a C-T-R...


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message