> On 3/22/16, 11:03 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" > <allenwittena...@yahoo.com.INVALID> wrote: > > >> On Mar 22, 2016, at 6:46 PM, Gangumalla, Uma <uma.ganguma...@intel.com> > >>wrote: > >> > >>> is it possible for me to setup a branch, self review+commit to that > >>> branch, then request a branch merge? > >> Basically this is something like Commit-Then-Review(here review later) > >> process right. I have not seen we followed this approach here( not sure > >>if > >> I missed some branches followed that). > > > > At least in recent times, YARN-3368 attempted to do that with the merge > >request found in YARN-4734. The first or second commit that went into > >that branch clearly has never been reviewed by another committer. Since > >a PMC member did the commit and merge request, I thought I¹d ask since it > >implies that the policy really is CTR for merge requests. (FWIW, I was > >the lone -1 on the merge request, otherwise it likely would have gone in > >given it already had 2 +1¹s despite a) breaking the build b) having > >significant license issues and c) no design doc.)
Let me clarify that the policy is NOT CTR for merging branches back to mainline. It is RTC, with the added proviso that you need 3 +1 votes from committers. There is also a 5-day waiting period before you can merge, so that people have time to chime in and possibly ask for changes prior to the merge, or express a -1 vote. I'm concerned that this discussion seems to be focusing on "how can I use procedures and rules to avoid the need to get reviews from the community" rather than "how can I get the community interested in giving me reviews and feedback." We still haven't spoken a word about what this feature or improvement does, or why we would want it. It is hard to say whether a feature branch makes sense without that context. best, Colin
