This discussion has revolved around the assumption that all changes go through the PR process.
If you’re a committer, nothing forces you to create a PR — you can also just commit directly to develop. PRs are commonly used when the committer wants feedback (from the PR checks and/or from the community), while changes to docs and tools are sometimes made directly on develop. By making it harder to use the PR process, will this have the unintended side-effect of nudging more committers to skip it entirely? > On Oct 21, 2019, at 11:38 AM, Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > +1, very well said > > Anthony > >> On Oct 21, 2019, at 11:05 AM, Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> *Reiterating the proposal:* >> Github branch protection rule for : >> - at least one review >> - Passing build, unit and stress test. >> >> >> In our opinion, no committer would want to check-in code with failing any >> of the above. >> >> Regards >> Nabarun >
