Hi everyone, I am happy to see this discussion going forward.
I also think: Contribution of content should be handled differently than tooling contributions. What do you think about branches with a certain review policy? E.g., content branches vs. tooling-feature branches? Sounds complicated, but following your comments I think it would help the project to move forward. Cheers, Mirko Am Fr., 24. Jan. 2020 um 12:09 Uhr schrieb Sönke Liebau <[email protected]>: > Hi everybody, > > as mentioned in our current board report I feel like we should revisit the > commit and review guidelines [1] that we currently have in place. > > I have heard that in at least one instance individuals decided to stop > contributing to this project because doing so was overly complicated and > regulated - which personally I take as a serious red flag. > > What do people think, should we move to a commit then review model, for > everything, just for content contributions, treat code separately, ... > > Personally I'd like to at least see some sort of check in place that only > content that was actually reviewed makes it into a release. > Personally, I feel that commit then review will lead to a large amount of > unreviewed content, but if I am the only one that thinks so I am willing to > adapt and try something else :) > > Best regards, > Sönke > > > [1] > > https://training.apache.org/developers/contributing.html#_toc_review_process1 >
