There are a couple of spots in the proposed bylaws that imply, or call for, details on how the project handles commits and code reviews. While that process should be spelled out, I believe that the work is significant enough that it should be refactored into its own effort, and the bylaws merely refer to it.
Here are the spots I found, which have also been commented upon in the doc. 1. Voting: -1 may be applied to a commit. 2. Actions table: Code Change as lazy approval. I'm not saying the current state is correct or not, as it's just what was present for ZK when Arshak made the copy. My suggestion is to replace the statements in the bylaws with referral to our Commit and Review standards, to be published later (hopefully not RSN [1]). Thoughts? [1] http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=real+soon+now -- | - - - | Bill Havanki | Solutions Architect, Cloudera Government Solutions | - - -
