Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Agenda: Development, Nov 27 2018 #19

Closed
lehnberg opened this issue Nov 15, 2018 · 2 comments
Closed

Agenda: Development, Nov 27 2018 #19

lehnberg opened this issue Nov 15, 2018 · 2 comments
Labels
development Anything related to development meetings Anything related to meetings

Comments

@lehnberg
Copy link
Collaborator

lehnberg commented Nov 15, 2018

Solicit suggestions for agenda items for the Development meeting to be held on Tuesday Nov 27 @ 15:00 UTC in Grin/Dev Gitter. Please comment to provide topics or suggestions.

Proposed agenda

  1. Igno's Retrospective
  2. Agenda review
  3. Action point follow ups from previous meetings
  4. PoW general item
  5. T4 Hard fork
  6. Mainnet planning
  7. Windows support
    • WSL vs Rustup for windows vs C++
    • Get wallet working first perhaps?
  8. Pull Request review process before merging
  9. Other questions
@lehnberg lehnberg added meetings Anything related to meetings development Anything related to development labels Nov 15, 2018
@lehnberg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I wrote in the Gitter that I didn't have anything to add to the agenda, but I lied! Added point 8 here above. Basically, with only a few weeks ahead of Mainnet, I would like to propose that we start to adopt a more formalized review process of PRs that get merged. Don't know what that should be exactly, but I think some kind of definition of what it takes for a PR to get merged would be helpful, no matter how basic that would be.

@ignopeverell
Copy link
Contributor

Regarding the review process, we agreed on the following at least for the time being:

1.Trivial PRs can be directly merged
2. Non trivial PRs need at least one review
3. Identified consensus-touching PRs need 2 reviews
4. Igno stops committing straight in the repo, even once in a while

There was some concern on the first point but developers all felt it was still too early to force reviews even on trivial issues. Note that the absence of a formal on a trivial PR doesn't stop anyone from checking whether it was actually trivial.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
development Anything related to development meetings Anything related to meetings
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants