Issue that you are talking about can be addressed by putting some additional guide lines in place. That way, as a process person who submits the patch should perform the same 'sanity check' before committing. Having another person responsible for sanity and commit complicates things.
-Kalyan On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Alexander Kolbasov <ak...@cloudera.com> wrote: > For assigning committers I think this may be a simple informal request - > for example to one of the reviewers or to someone else to volunteer. It may > delay commits a bit indeed, but I don't think it will be a problem. > > The problem I am trying to address is the quality of the review process. > Suppose we have some change C for which Alice have some comments and Bob > have some and eventually Alice says Ship it and it isn't clear whether Bob > is Ok with the change or not, but since ALice is the committer, the author > of the patch thinks that it is ok to submit it right away. That's where a > 'sanity check' person would be useful. > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Sergio Pena <sergio.p...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > How is this committer going to be assigned? > > This might lead to some complications if the committer assigned leave for > > vacations afterward and the community is not notified. It will end up > > delaying the commits and the author (being a committer) won't be able to > > commit the patch due to this process. What are we trying to solve with > > this? > > > > Btw, I've seen in other projects that some committers usually wait 1 or 2 > > days to commit a patch after a +1 has been done on it. This is to allow > > other reviewers to disagree with the +1 and give more feedback before > > committing the patch. Would this help? > > > > - Sergio > > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Stephen Moist <mo...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > > > Sounds reasonable to me as long as they can get someone to do the > commit > > > in a reasonable timeframe. I wouldn’t want to have to wait days for it > > to > > > get in after it has been properly reviewed. > > > > > > > On Feb 22, 2018, at 12:22 PM, Alexander Kolbasov <ak...@cloudera.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > > > I would like to propose an adjustment to the commit process in Sentry > > > > project. The idea is to require that commit should not be done by the > > > > person providing the change but by some other committer. This > > committer's > > > > responsibility is to ensure that all code review concerns were > > addressed > > > in > > > > one way or another and to do a final sanity check. This committer can > > be > > > > one of the reviewers or someone who didn't review the code. > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > - Alex > > > > > > > > >
