Process for commits

[awoods]

Hello Team,
Pull-requests are beginning to stack up in this project.
We should define a process by which we, as committers, can be responsive to PRs.

Majority committer 👍 with no 👎 ?

[ruebot]

👍

[azaroth42]

👍

[escowles]

👍 and #7 is ready to merge

[ruebot]

Given the squashing involved in #7, should we have a process for merging? Sometimes we can just click the nice 'Merge' button here, other times we need to merge manually (rebasing). For the manual merging, is that whoever is around, and calls it? Or, should it just be @awoods?

[awoods]

I guess it is a matter of taste. If commits are more meaningful when left separate, then leaving them separate makes sense. If a squash makes the intent of the final commit more clear, then squashing makes sense.
My preference is to have as clean and meaningful history as possible. @awoods certainly does not have a monopoly on squashing, but I am happy to do it in the face of a collection of wandering commits.

Maybe the process could be:

• If a PR has only one commit, click the button to merge
• If a PR has more than one commit, decide with the contributor if a squash is appropriate
• In either case, the contributor should never commit his/her own PR.

[ruebot]

👍 to that!

[escowles]

👍 that sounds good to me -- and I'm also happy to squash commits as needed.

[awoods]

3 of 5 committers. I guess the process is official.