Yes, I agree.

I'll create a KnoxIDF Merge Jira to track the additional reviews and
changes that are requested but okay to defer at the moment.
I think that it would be good to keep an eye on those as they build up
especially if you are tagged in a given review task so that we can burn
some down before the merge event.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KNOX-3373


On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 2:10 PM Sandor Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Larry,
>
> +1 from me.
>
> I think this makes sense for the knox_idf branch and should help us keep
> the momentum going without lowering the bar for what eventually gets merged
> into main.
>
> I also like the idea of tracking the merge with a JIRA, including subtasks
> for items needing a closer look later. We could even capture code review
> comments there when we decide they are OK to defer until merge time, giving
> us a clear list to work through before merging.
>
> I'd still expect each PR to get a basic sanity check before merging into
> the feature branch (beyond the existing unit/integration tests), just to
> catch anything obvious and keep the branch in good shape.
>
> This sounds like a good balance between moving faster and keeping track of
> what we don't want to lose sight of.
>
> Sandor
>
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 12:10 AM larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hello Knox-ers -
> >
> > I am thinking that we might want to consider switching to a more relaxed
> > review criteria for the KnoxIDF work. Since we have at least two
> community
> > members working on that branch, perhaps we move to something closer to
> CTR.
> >
> > This would allow use to defer some reviews that may be trickier or
> blocked
> > by the SME not being immediately available but someone else can review
> at a
> > higher level and note what things need resolution prior to feature branch
> > merge into main.
> >
> > Maybe, we create a Jira for tracking the merge of knox_idf and add
> subtasks
> > for things that need deeper review at merge time. Then we burn down
> > whatever tasks are tracked there before the merge.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > --larry
> >
>

Reply via email to