On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:38 AM, Justin Erenkrantz <[email protected]> wrote: > One question that we need to discuss is whether every merge is RTC > (Review-than-Commit) or CTR (Commit-than-Review). > > My take is that we should start with RTC and, if the review process gets in > the way of innovation, then we go to CTR. But, until everyone learns the > rules of the road, I think RTC is justified. Under RTC rules, all commits > should be reviewed (+1) by three committers before being merged. (If you > are a committer, then two others are needed.). Any committer can veto (-1) > a patch - which should cause a discussion about resolving the veto. > > So, #1 - your suggestion sounds right with the need for three committers to > approve before merge to develop. > > For #2, I think it should be a separate branch and require 3 signoffs for > now. > > As the project matures, "obvious" commits can be CTR.
I am very much a +1 on the above suggestion. Thanks, Roman.
