John,

I'm the only one to merge PR and it's only to simplify process (PR shouldn't be merge in github way but in Fast Forward way to keep a clean history) . This said, except for typos or missing words I never merge without approval of the EG.
Now I can understand that you'd like to figure on the member list on the github  CDI-SPEC organisation but it's not related to this proposal.

The process I proposed is not about "who" merge but on what basis the merger can merge.

Antoine


Le mar. 3 mai 2016 à 15:50, John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com> a écrit :

Antoine,

Why do only some EG members have access to merge PRs?

On May 3, 2016 9:44 AM, "Antoine Sabot-Durand" <antoine@sabot-durand.net> wrote:
Hi guys,

As you know we plan to release CDI 2.0 before the end of January. It let's us around 6 months to complete the spec.

I think we really should find a way to enhance our focus on reviewing proposal and code.
Adding special Hangout meetings proved itself a good solution to go that way, but I think we should also work on rules adoption for PR.

So I propose that:
- PR should stay open at least one week.
- It could be merged (after at least a week) if 4 EG members votes for it (+1 on the PR).
- As no one is error proof if someone has an objection to a PR to be merged he could raise his concern and justify his objection.
- The following discussion should lead either to a revision of the PR or a +1 from the objector
- If no agreement is reached, to avoid blocage a vote will be called on this ML to adopt or reject the PR. 

I'm not a big fan of over processed team work, but we really have to deliver. 
For the moment I think we can avoid having too much process on ticket choice (we don't have enough contributors to go that way)

Wdyt ?

Antoine

_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev

Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.