On Mon, Feb 14, 2022, 9:28 AM David Sidrane <david.sidr...@nscdg.com> wrote:
> I am opening this discussion to widen the audience for feedback on the > rules for merging. The original interexchange was in [1] > > > > 1 ) Given the geographical and time differences should we consider that > once a review with approval* has been done the PR’s author can merge it? > > > > 2) Should we consider requiring more than one organization/company to > approve a PR before it is merged. > > > > Background: > > > > If only one company does a review, that can lead to undo influence as noted > as the "The Enemies" > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/blob/master/INVIOLABLES.md> of > the INVIOLABLES [2]: > > “Focus on the values of the organization, not the values of the Open Source > project. Need to support both.” > > *The change would define PR approval as requiring a review/approval from > more than the members of one company or organization. > > > > > > I am in favor of both these changes. > > > > David > > > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/5320#issuecomment-1020379240 > > [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/blob/master/INVIOLABLES.md I am generally opposed to both of these. It is quite rare that we need a crazy fast merge turn around on a PR. And if something is approved and straight up broken in master that needs to get in then I think forgiveness can be used to self merge. I also generally do not have a big issue about people from the same company reviewing and merging. I could see the arguments for shared code but then I think we are nitpicking. I prefer the velocity with a few oops that can be reverted along the way if needed. There is also parts of the code base where the best people to review are on the same company. I think most of the concerns here are best addressed not by process but increasing the number of contributors who can participate. (more committers and PPMC) --Brennan
