You could assign certain tasks as RTC if you know it will touch critical areas.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Leif Hedstrom <zw...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > I think we need to have this discussion again, for various reasons: > > 1) Our code base is getting bigger, with a fair amount of new changes > from contributors old and new to the projects. > > 2) We’re sort of already doing this on a largish number of commits via > Github, so maybe formalizing it is in order. > > 3) We’re honestly not doing a good job on the CTR (the C is good, the R > not so much). > > > Now, RTC comes with its own significant amount of baggage, and is > definitely no panacea. Reviews alone is not going to solve all the > problems, that’s for sure. RTC also means that our most experienced > committers will be forced into reviewing, or we risk stalling out the > community entirely. > > I’m personally 50/50 on this, which is to say, I’d like for us to continue > doing CTR, but I’m not convinced it’s going to work as things are today. > The question then is, can we improve our CTR such that we can keep it? I > don’t know. I’m also concerned that since CTR isn’t working well, even when > when we do review before and after, without some serious thought as to what > review actually means, things will not improve (and we probably just made > it worse). > > And discuss. > > — Leif > > P.s > We voted in the community a long time ago to do CTR, but it’s time to > discuss to either revalidate that decision, or rethink / vote again.
