There were discussions on several jiras and threads recently about how RTC actually works in Hadoop. My opinion has always been that for a patch to be committed it needs an approval (+1) of at least one committer other than the author and no -1s. The Bylaws seem to be stating just that: "Consensus approval of active committers, but with a minimum of one +1." See the full version under Actions / Code Change <http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html#Decision+Making>
Turned out people have different readings of that part of Bylaws, and different opinions on how RTC should work in different cases. Some of the questions that were raised include: - Should we clarify the Code Change decision making clause in Bylaws? - Should there be a relaxed criteria for "trivial" changes? - Can a patch be committed if approved only by a non committer? - Can a patch be committed based on self-review by a committer? - What is the point for a non-committer to review the patch? Creating this thread to discuss these (and other that I sure missed) issues and to combine multiple discussions into one. My personal opinion we should just stick to the tradition. Good or bad, it worked for this community so far. I think most of the discrepancies arise from the fact that reviewers are hard to find. May be this should be the focus of improvements rather than the RTC rules. Thanks, --Konst
