On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Reynold Xin <r...@apache.org> wrote:
> Most non-trivial software projects I worked on (paid or un-paid) have RTC > culture. I cannot represent every single project, but in the ones that I'm > closely involved with that use RTC, it is simply part of the culture and > recognition that mandatory code review improves code quality. (We can > debate about this in a separate thread, since this is not what this thread > is about.) > Quality has been debated in this thread. "R" stands for Review, and it occurs in both models. There is no basis for saying that RTC produces better quality. > I don't think we should elevate everything to "Apache Way", "trust", or > "community building". RTC vs CTR is not about: > > 1. Apache Way > > Given ASF doesn't require RTC vs CTR vs somewhere in between, and different > TLPs already follow different ways, I don't think any mentor or the > incubator should force their view upon incubating projects. > Nobody is forcing anything. Personally, I am saying RTC is destructive, and am willing to give every podling that message. > 2. Trust > > It's just part of a project's process and culture. Greg brought up that RTC > is an indication of lack of trust and committers are just treated as normal > contributors: "What I haven't seen is an explanation why a committer must > be treated the same as a drive-by. Both are subject to requiring > 'permission' to make even the simplest of changes under RTC." > > Committers are required to use JIRA, github, and follow many other > processes that "drive-by" should follow. I don't see why "code review" is > different from filing JIRA tickets. In most RTC projects, committers do > have more rights -- a committer can review somebody else's patch and commit > it. > Please see Branko's note. Committers in an RTC project are disrespected. They have no more regard than drive-by contributors. > 3. community building > > Lots of successful open source projects, both inside and outside ASF, > employ RTC. As Todd mentioned, almost all the top 10 most starred (on > github) projects use some form of RTC, so it is hard for me to believe that > RTC would hinder community building. Of course, one can always argue that > if those projects had employed CTR, maybe they would've been even more > popular. But then we got into the area that we just have to agree to > disagree. > Well, you could also look at openhub.net: https://www.openhub.net/orgs/apache ... I believe those top 10 are *all* CTR. ... in fact, of ALL projects tracked by openhub, httpd and svn are #2 and #4 respectively[*]. They are models of communities where trust rules and CTR is the basis of operation. Using GitHub as a proxy for evaluation skews towards git-based projects, whereas openhub is tool independent. -g [*] #1 and #3 are Firefox and MySQL, which are both corporate driven; our CTR/RTC model does not apply; #5 is PHP which seems to use CTR.
