There's your answer Cater, it was intentional, unreviewed, and unilateral. On 2022/11/15 21:22:29 Oleg Kalnichevski wrote: > On Tue, 2022-11-15 at 15:41 -0500, Gary Gregory wrote: > > This is a distraction from the problem I brought up in another > > thread: Oleg > > erases other people's commits at he wishes, CTR or RTC won't matter. > > This > > is not the Apache way. > > > > You have a long history of making really bad changes to the project > code based on nothing more than your personal wishes and preferences. > Moreover, you repeatedly ignored multiple requests to have a discussion > before making such changes at the very least, a basic decency toward > your fellow project members. > > THIS is not the Apache way. > > Oleg > > > > Gary > > > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022, 15:37 Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Am 2022-11-15 um 14:32 schrieb Oleg Kalnichevski: > > > > We have an implicit commit-them-review policy ever since the > > > > inception > > > > of the project in the year of 2005. We all are free to commit > > > > what we > > > > deem appropriate but no commit can be considered safe until it > > > > has been > > > > voted upon and tagged with a release tag. > > > > > > > > If an objection has been raised about any commit in the > > > > development > > > > branch it can be reverted and should be resubmitted through a PR > > > > and put > > > > to a review. This basically applies to all committers and any > > > > commit. > > > > Any committer can ask for a commit to be reverted and the change- > > > > set put > > > > to a review. > > > > > > > > If any commiter no longer feels comfortable with this approach I > > > > personally will have no problem switching to the pre-commit > > > > review > > > > policy whereby every change must go through a PR first. Naturally > > > > that > > > > would call for a format vote. > > > > > > You guys might want to read dev@maven.a.o. We had this discussion > > > recently. Coincedence. > > > > > > After the Maven 3.7.0 fiasco we have moved from CTR to RTC which -- > > > yes, > > > it slows down the process -- *but* drastically improved the quality > > > of > > > the code/new changes /before/ they land and reverts are basically > > > down > > > to zero. Additionally, people tend to do better self reviews. I did > > > a > > > lot of self reviews on recently Doxia changes and noticed myself > > > that my > > > PRs were incomplete. I would never go back to CTR, personally. > > > (except > > > for typo fixes or alike) > > > > > > Of course, CTR means that you have qualified people who can review > > > in a > > > decent timeframe (needs to be defined). It is never wrong to have > > > another pair of eyes on a solution. > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@hc.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@hc.apache.org
