incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)
Date Fri, 20 Nov 2015 14:02:27 GMT
A combination approach seems like it would be the best to me. Is the process you guys use documented?

As I said, the part that bothers me with the way RTC is done in the project I am involved
in is that I can’t commit my own stuff.


> On Nov 20, 2015, at 6:09 AM, Jim Jagielski <> wrote:
> Lets recall that 'review' is not just about trust (or whether
> or not it exists), it's also about this little thing called
> *oversight*. It's to ensure that at least 3 people are
> engaged enough to be able to not only vet the code/patch/whatever,
> but to make sure that should the original patch provider
> drop out of sight, that there are enough people around to
> keep that code up-to-date.
> As Joe sez, this whole discussion seems weird to me. httpd
> (for example) uses RTC, CTR and Lazy Consensus simultaneously
> and works like a dream. And considering that httpd is pretty
> much the "standard" or "basis" for the Apache Way (or, at least
> one of the main ones), any suggestion that one of these methods
> is broken, or whatever, seems wonky.
>> On Nov 17, 2015, at 9:05 AM, Ted Dunning <> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:33 PM, Jim Jagielski <> wrote:
>>> Certainly we need both a
>>> Review and a Commit and one must be done before the other,
>>> right?
>> Well, not necessarily.  We need a commit.  The review is, strictly
>> speaking, optional. That means that the three choices are C, RTC, CTR.  The
>> empty string is plausible, but implies a dead community.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message