On 07/01/2013 08:50 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Ivan Zhakov wrote on Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 16:42:27 +0400: >> I remember we discussed policy about requiring three +1 for merging >> branches. > > Link, please? >
My recollection was that the discussion that was had occurred in person in
Berlin. I included a mention thereof in my email to dev@ that summarized
the whole release timeline change proposal[1].
{{{
Should we require vote-based approval on the reintegration of feature
branches? At least some of the hackathon attendees favor the typical “three
+1's and no vetos” – the room was not polled for general consensus here,
though. Proponents claim that this both helps to solve the inherent dangers
of code bombs (it minimizes *cognitive* destabilization) and also encourages
feature composers to do a better job of vetting their designs in advance so
as to a) ignite interest and attention and b) reduce the chance of
widespread disapproval of the feature or the approach taken.
}}}
But I don't recall any follow-up discussion or anything approaching
consensus having happened in an official channel.
-- C-Mike
[1] http://svn.haxx.se/dev/archive-2013-06/0243.shtml
--
C. Michael Pilato <cmpil...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Enterprise Cloud Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
