From ec48c71f7098cc53200e5d7c099ab00e4f569087 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon McVittie Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 16:01:57 +0100 Subject: Add davidz to the review cabal Acked-by: Will Thompson Acked-by: Colin Walters --- HACKING | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'HACKING') diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING index 7a5a792c..036961f2 100644 --- a/HACKING +++ b/HACKING @@ -326,5 +326,4 @@ John Palmieri Scott James Remnant Will Thompson Simon McVittie - - +David Zeuthen -- cgit v1.2.1 From 4bcffe1e05cfc22eb29b41d39f7ceca14b45a9a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon McVittie Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 16:02:43 +0100 Subject: Relax review criteria for the review cabal themselves, as discussed on-list Colin agreed in principle and nobody actually objected, so here we go... --- HACKING | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) (limited to 'HACKING') diff --git a/HACKING b/HACKING index 036961f2..bebf7ac1 100644 --- a/HACKING +++ b/HACKING @@ -298,6 +298,20 @@ rules are: - if there's a live unresolved controversy about a change, don't commit it while the argument is still raging. + - at their discretion, members of the reviewer group may also commit + branches/patches under these conditions: + + - the branch does not add or change API, ABI or wire-protocol + + - the branch solves a known problem and is covered by the regression tests + + - there are no objections from the rest of the review group within + a week of the patches being attached to Bugzilla + + - the committer gets a positive review on Bugzilla from someone they + consider qualified to review the change (e.g. a colleague with D-Bus + experience; not necessarily a member of the reviewer group) + - regardless of reviews, to commit a patch: - make check must pass - the test suite must be extended to cover the new code -- cgit v1.2.1