Step 4
Ultimately, it is the committer who is responsible for assuring that
(1) the change is technically correct, complete, and of the highest
quality. And that (2) the change is consistent with all of the
principles of the Inviolables: The change must not violate the
portable POSIX interface, the change must conform to the architectural
principles of the OS, the change must not expose any platform
dependencies that would have any impact on other users of NuttX.
At this point, the committer should be confident that the change is in
full compliance with the coding standard and will not break the build.
Then there is Justin Mclean's response to this. I cannot find it, but
it is where the phrase "Scratch what itches" comes from. In Step 4,
Justin recommend not being so former. In most Apache projects,
commiters just "scratch what itches" meaning that they review and
merge commits that are interesting to them.
Found this too:
From Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS - NuttX Workflow]
Date Wed, 18 Dec 2019 21:46:09 GMT
HI,
3.
PMC should triage and assign the change to a committer. PMC may
also review for conformance with the Inviolables If this review
fails, the change is declined.
Most of the Apache projects I’m on let committers select what they what to
review and work
on rather than being assigned it. It’s often referred to as “scratch your own
itch”.
Tha not to say that this project can’t do it differently, but the workflow may
need to consider
that people are volunteers and their availability may vary.
Thanks,
Justin
Now I think I have reposted EVERY email that proposes specific workflow
requirements. There are several more that comment on these, but I will
leave that as an exercise for anyone interested.
