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.