Hi, I think that we should discuss options here i.e. we have a defined process for ensuring our code quality. If this is not working then we should agree the outcome i.e. if you don't have an item reviewed within x weeks then the commit is reverted from trunk ? (For the Java items, we should not be releasing anything not reviewed iiuc our approach here.)
Drastic I know, but it's not cricket imho to have agreed to adopt an approach and then have Aidan be the policeman for the project. Thoughts ? Regards, Marnie On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Aidan Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm concerned at the number of reviews which are outstanding, some of > which have been there for Some Time, over a month in some cases. > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=12310520&status=10006&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC&sorter/field=updated&sorter/order=DESC > > We haven't even had a particularly heavy period of change, which isn't > boding well for commit-then-review as a strategy for ensuring > everything gets reviewed. > > - Aidan > -- > Apache Qpid - World Domination through Advanced Message Queueing > http://cwiki.apache.org/qpid > "Nine-tenths of wisdom consists in being wise in time." - Theodore > Roosevelt >
