Release and Commit Policies

[Jiri Vanek]

On 05/12/2011 03:50 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/ReleasePolicy
>> http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/CommitPolicy
>>
>> These are largely explicit documentation of our current processes,
>> but comments are welcomed.
>>
>> As specified on the wiki, don't make changes to these documents
>> without first discussing it either or on the Discussion page.
>>
>> I also updated the Main page:
>>
>> http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/Main_Page
>>
>> to cleanup the contributing section and link to these documents.

 >"The review process should continue until all parties are happy with 
 >the patch."

This is very dangerous  - one single person can block patch then (maybe 
uninterested person?) . Even when it is reviewer himself, then there is 
no judge when two _opinions_ (just! opinions) are standing  against each 
other.

 > " Unless otherwise stated by the reviewer"

This in contradiction with previous sentence. When reviewer said It 
looks ok then possible it can not be stopped by someone else 
(afterwards? Or overlap someone else "against" hints?) ?


 > "it should be assumed that the final version of the patch should be
 > posted and an acknowledgement acquired before the patch is committed."

Does it really only _should_ ??


Regards J.