<snip>
Voting -
1. If the R-T-C policy is in effect the document says that +1 means ‘I have tested this patch myself, and found it good.’.
I find this requirement to be too strict. I think that testing a patch is the responsibility of the patch submitter and reviewing a patch should not require actual testing.
changed it to reviewed/tested
thanks
I suggest the following instead -
For me reviewing a patch (+1 for a patch) means: - The patch make sense - The patch follows the project standards (e.g. code format) - The patch takes into account the different aspects/components of the project - The patch does not changes any core behavior or introduces new concepts that were not discussed in the mailing list beforehand.
I've incorporated this, take a look and shout if you don't like how I did it...
looks good
If the reviewer wants to test the patch or thinks additional testing is needed then he better do so but i would not go and set that as a requirement.
2. The document says that a three +1 votes are required for a pass. In the context of patch approval that requirement might be an overkill.
I am looking at the engine project as an example there are a lot of patches a day, large part of them are not too complicated and one ack can be enough for validation. Requiring 3 acks can slow the development and i am not sure it is justified/needed.
I suggest that by default a patch should require only one ack. If a patch introduces a major change or new concepts the patch submitter should mark the patch as such and ask for 3 acks. In addition if a patch reviewer thinks a patch has some level of complexity he can also ask the patch to have 3 acks before approval.
This approach can also contribute for Developing and Maturing projects which do not have the needed resources to deal with 3 acks for each patch.
I thought I covered this, you want 3 for anything big, but a simple ack for minor stuff is fine. I re-read and added a bit to make it clearer.
I see it now, yep.
All applied to the web site.
Thanks, how about changing the "Adding a sub-project" to "Adding a project"? i am fine with keeping it sub-project, just wanted to make sure it did not simply sleep. Livnat