On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:35 PM, John Vines <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > So I am interpreting it as all code modifications must be into the codebase > or review board by the freeze date. Which could be beneifical, however- > 1. What about the case where a patch needs to be modified? What if it's a > really minor change vs. a major change? Where's the line? > That's up to the release manager, though they can ask the community for feedback. :) Generally, I think this is a non-issue. review board lets you post updates to your patch. If it didn't, feedback would be useless. I don't think we're saying you can't update your review board. So I think it comes down to the feedback itself. if it suggests a change that you can incorporate into the existing patch, good to go. if it's requires a rewrite, then it sounds more like a -1 and goes to the removal-vote process. > 2. In the case of features that have multiple subtasks, they have > complementing features that NEED to exist to make the main feature > usable/maintainable. What happens if we don't get those in? > That's why we have a call-to-remove part of the vote, right? committer votes will determine if a given feature has retained enough to be included. This is also a big advantage of review-then-commit and iterating within the ticket before pushing up. You can have these kind of inclusion conversations at a much lower cost when you aren't facing the prospect of trudging through a bunch of reverts. -- Sean
