On 27.07.2015 09:33, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> Can you describe at which point a master becomes a release branch in >>> Subversion? >> http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/releasing.html >> >>> Also, what happens if an occasional bad commit sneaked into the release >> branch? >> >> It's almost impossible for that to happen, as per the process described >> on that page. But if it does, we just revert it and try again, usually >> after creating or fixing a backport branch. >> > I kind of see the point of bypassing reviews on simple fixes. However, > *simple* is a relative term. I think we should define what *simple* means. > I have some ideas, but I would like to hear some other opinions as well.
Why not just trust developers to have a brain and use it? I don't expect *you* need a document to decide which of your changes needs peer review; so why expect that other committers need such a document? Just apply good judgement, guys. To be clear: someone who cannot make such a judgement call is failing a fundamental requirement for committer status, IMNSHO. -- Brane
