Hi,
Example value as 3 days or other values are to discuss and can be an agreed
value. Now such values are not important ... it will be the last item to
confirm.

I only want to show how the process can look.

Currently we only have sentence that we use "Commit then Review" policy
without more details

pt., 4 lut 2022 o 11:58 Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> napisał(a):

> Yes, reviewing prs is time consuming, though usually worth it.
> 3 days does not seem enough for normal pr reviews I think.
> If a maintainer disagrees with this and they do think they can review every
> prs inside the 3 days limit, then I will be glad to show him why he can't,
> just tell me what repos he maintains.
> I do have the ability (and experience) in creating 100+ positively
> meaningful prs per day.
>
>
> Tibor Digana <tibordig...@apache.org> 于2022年2月4日周五 18:00写道:
>
> > IMHO the reactions against PRs should be technically critical.
> > IMHO the PRs from contributors should not be accepted unless there are
> > objections or pending objections.
> > Example, would you move your hand up and accept long commit in a PR even
> if
> > you do not see the following statements?
> > *if ( cha[] == char[] )*
> > Sometimes, you need to open the PR in your IDE because GH view is pure
> for
> > complex changes. You should do everything in order to understand the PR
> and
> > you must be convinced about the proposals almost like you were the author
> > of the PR even if you are not the author.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 12:23 PM Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > 3 days?
> > > according to my experience, usually you need 30 - 180 days.
> > >
> > > Tibor Digana <tibordig...@apache.org> 于2022年1月28日周五 06:40写道:
> > >
> > > > It's nice to write some rules but still the developers are not
> > machines.
> > > > You can, for instance, get some vote for totally crazy things like
> > > removing
> > > > public method in a library which is widely used in ASF or in the
> world.
> > > > Yes, your right against the rules but was this according to the best
> > > > practices, those best practices which must be learned by the
> developers
> > > for
> > > > years?
> > > > Was the public method @Deprecated before removal?
> > > > Did you check the consumers of this artifact in the Maven repository
> > and
> > > > checked or asked the projects if it can be removed?
> > > > Did you announce the community on the site?
> > > > What if there are other deprecated methods and they have survived
> > several
> > > > releases but still not removed, and this method is going to be
> removed
> > > > without deprecation? Is it consistent in project which is used by
> > others?
> > > > These are all the things which cannot be written in the rules but we
> > have
> > > > it somewhere in our mind.
> > > > Do you obey your internal rules?
> > > > Which have higher priority?
> > > >
> > > > I don't need to have an answer for my questions, since they are not
> > > > questions...
> > > >
> > > > T
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 8:46 PM Slawomir Jaranowski <
> > > > s.jaranow...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > On the page "Apache Maven Project Roles" [1] we have paragraph
> > > > > about Committers with:
> > > > >
> > > > > The Apache Maven project uses a Commit then Review policy and has a
> > > > number
> > > > > of conventions which should be followed.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks like Review then Commit policy is from svn time, so should be
> > > > > refreshed or confirmed that is actual.
> > > > >
> > > > > When we want Review than Commit policy, we need some rules which
> > allow
> > > us
> > > > > to effectively work if nobody is interested for feedback.
> > > > > We also need rules / examples for direct commits, when they are
> > > > acceptable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do we need different rules for Maven core, plugins, shared ... etc
> > > > >
> > > > > Example of rule:
> > > > >
> > > > > PR -> no feedback for X days -> send a mail on dev@, if still not
> > > > feedback
> > > > > after X days after mail  -> proceed alone
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://maven.apache.org/project-roles.html#committers
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Sławomir Jaranowski

Reply via email to