On Feb 20, 2012, at 5:38 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Jun Heider <j...@realeyes.com> wrote:
>> ...have we decided on a standard process for committing to trunk? For
>> instance is +1 voting on the ML the
>> Apache version of code reviews - I hope not since that seems like it'd be
>> too slow and cumbersome...
>
> The most common way in Apache projects is CTR, Commit-Then-Review: you
> commit, and someone can complain if they don't like it (including
> vetos if really needed, described at
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html). That's by far my
> favorite, if people are paying attention (subscribed to the
> flex-commits list etc.) bad things are caught quickly, and people try
> to be careful to avoid looking stupid too often.
>
> The PPMC might decide to use RTC, Review-Then-Commit for some critical
> parts if needed, where a suggested patch (attached to a JIRA issue)
> needs to be reviewed before being applied. A committer can also always
> go that route and ask for review if unsure about a particular patch.
>
> -Bertrand
I think personally, with JIRA being around my preference would be a
Review-Then-Commit. Is the JIRA hooked up to the SVN repo? For instance being
able to add a "RE: {Ticket Number}" to the commit message?
