I would love to switch back and forth from RTC and CTR for MetaModel during dev cycle but not sure if a suitable model.
I like CTR if we all have equal knowledge of the code which at this point only maybe 3 initial committers know the code well. Thats why I proposed RTC in general and big features and bug fixes but use judgement when committing for small changes. - Henry On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Matt Franklin <[email protected]>wrote: > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Henry Saputra <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Hi MetaModel community, > > > > Per email from Matt, I'd like to formally start discussion about Review > > Then Commit (RTC) or Commit Then Review (CTR). > > > > I actually like to use review then commit (RTC) for big changes tat > > requires changes to major code flow and behavior. > > For small bug fixes we probably dont need code review or use common sense > > when needed. > > > > In general, I agree. The only thing I would change is that it depends on > where we are at in the development cycle. If we are nearing release, RTC > makes a ton of sense for any large change, but early in development it can > be a big barrier to moving quickly. > > Thoughts? > > > > > > All comments and suggestions are welcomed. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Henry > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Matt Franklin <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > This also brings up the question as to what type of community MetaModel > > > is/wants to be. Are we Review Then Commit (RTC) or Commit Then Review > > > (CTR)? There are positives and negatives to both approaches, but most > > > communities I have seen are CTR. > > > > > > > > >
