/
review_process.txt
55 lines (37 loc) · 3.54 KB
/
review_process.txt
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
.. _review_process:
GeoNode Patch Review Process
============================
This document outlines the code review process for GeoNode code.
Each commit proposed for inclusion in GeoNode should be reviewed by at least one developer other than the author.
For pragmatic reasons, some developers, referred to in this document as *core committers*, may commit directly to the GeoNode repository without waiting for review.
Such changes are still subject to review, and may be reverted if they fail any of the [[Review Criteria]].
A related process is [[Improvement Proposals]].
While patch review protects code quality in the GeoNode project at a small granularity, the Improvement Proposal process is intended to promote coordinated design and feedback for larger modifications such as new features or architectural changes.
Goals
-----
By requiring a review of code coming into GeoNode, we aim to maintain code quality within the GeoNode project while still allowing contributions from the GeoNode community.
Review Criteria
---------------
Patch reviews should adhere to the standards set in the [[Review Criteria]], a [[Project Steering Committee]] approved set of criteria for the inclusion of new code.
Process
-------
For contributors who do not have commit access to the GeoNode repository, the review process is as follows:
0. Find or create a ticket describing the feature or bug to be resolved.
1. Create changes to GeoNode code addressing the ticket.
2. Publish those changes and request a review from the GeoNode committers.
The recommended format is a GitHub [pull request](https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-requests/).
If you are unable or unwilling to provide a change as a branch on GitHub, please consult the developer's list for advice.
3. At least one GeoNode committer should review the submitted changes.
If he finds the patch acceptable, the changes will be pulled into GeoNode.
If problems are found, then he should list them clearly in order to allow the original author to update the submission (at which point we return to point 2 in this process.)
In the case of a feature idea which is simply not suitable for inclusion as core GeoNode functionality, the patch may be rejected outright.
_Note: If after a few days your patch has not been reviewed by any GeoNode committer, please feel free to bring it up either in the mailing list or the IRC channel. The GeoNode community (and it's committers) try to respond quickly and give adequate feedback to maintain the interest of new potential members. However, sometimes other responsibilities prevent us from responding quickly._
Core Committers
---------------
It is assumed that core committers are familiar with the quality guidelines and capable of producing acceptable patches without the need for waiting on review.
Therefore, core committers may make changes without requesting review first (although they are welcome to request review for code if they feel it is appropriate.)
For commits made without prior review, committers should review the changes and revert them if they are in violation of the project quality guidelines.
Becoming a Core Committer
-------------------------
In order for a developer to become a core committer, he must demonstrate familiarity with the quality guidelines for the GeoNode project by producing at least two patches which successfully pass review and are merged without requiring modification.
A candidate for core committer-ship must be nominated by a member of the [[Project Steering Committee]], and approved via Apache consensus voting among PSC members.