Daniel van Vugt
daniel.van.vugt at canonical.com
Tue Apr 23 02:02:52 UTC 2013
I've noticed that we're usually split in style within mir-team. Though
it often seems a little skewed as some of the team is working on
projects outside of lp:mir so do not express as many opinions.
Being split, it's clear that a unanimity/veto approach to code reviews
will not work. So I suggest:
A proposal requires two approvals to land. Opposing reviews should be
considered by those who Approve and a final decision made by Approvers.
Those who oppose a proposal have the right to have their position
considered by those who approve it. However disapproval should not
always be a veto. This should apply to lp:mir.
Further to recent experience, I think it's inappropriate to apply the
same rules when proposing a merge into someone's personal branch. You
should not be able to force the owner of a branch to accept changes that
he does not want his name on.
We're not going to find unanimity very often. So I would hope we can at
least agree on a basic approach to breaking the regular deadlocks and
getting code landed. I'm sure we're all tired of iterating the same
branches week after week.
More information about the Mir-devel