-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David Jencks wrote: > I agree with Jeff that this change is unsatisfactory but I'm not as > sure as he is that backing it out is necessary, perhaps we can move > forward to an acceptable solution instead.
It is permissible for HEAD to be broken. This is development, after all; committing only perfect code is an unreasonable goal. > I also am not so sure that this magnitude of change needs prior > discussion on the list. I've frequently made larger changes without > discussion of my specific code. I've also broken lots of stuff at > various times. Let's all come into agreement on the development model, then. Apache historically has use two distinct models, called Review Then Commit (RTC) and Commit Then Review (CTR). Under the RTC model, all changes -- except to docco or minor bug fixes -- need to be reviewed and garner at least three +1 votes before being committed. Giving a +1 means you've applied the patch and tested it yourself. If a patch doesn't get the requisite number of positive votes, it doesn't get committed. Under CTR, any change can get committed at any time, although major ones are supposed to follow the RTC model. Committers need to ask themselves whether the commit will spark controversy; if so, they should follow RTC and get support first. The advantages of RTC are code quality and team building. Nothing goes in that hasn't been tested by at least three people. The primary disadvantage is that its conservative approach tends to slow down development. Its enemies are self-interest and apathy; supporters need to lobby for their work to be tested, and all developers need to remember that they're dependent upon one another. The advantage of CTR is prototyping speed. Its disadvantages are less-assured quality and community divisiveness. Its enemy is ego. Since criticism occurs after code has been committed, personal investment is greater and defensiveness higher. Developers are typically less aware of each others' work. I believe it is safe to say that Geronimo has been operating in CTR mode, but I think the specifics and ground rules may not have been spelt out, or need to be again. Is this the way in which the majority wants to continue to proceed? - -- #ken P-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBQ8vmHJrNPMCpn3XdAQKGGwQA2dI23/BqrrzV0pBrUVJLsp00gOKIFMst 3ad2Dek5+pQW5cBn1bjLE8eDL8fk4nGRXKp+BZWYQkhEFmEHnCVSPZLvh8Ij31aj 70drBEGY1fS49cUuEDyhs4xLm3IE+DJ5tq1PA6kGsC3rSn/DF9+VTc+kiEq/evLu 1TLm3gWtEYM= =x+HN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
