Yesterday I committed a major change to the master branch. In hindsight (with Chris pointing it out ;-) I shouldn't have committed such a change to the master branch without review. I think it would be good to devise some basic processes right now.
* For "minor" code changes, and basically any test or documentation: commit-then-review to master branch
* For other changes, commit to a feature-branch -- basically review-then-commit although it's technically committed but not to master. After "ample" opportunity for review and if there is no -1 vote then it can be merged to trunk.
With regards to feedback on specific commits, I would like for us to try using GitHub's commit commenting features. Essentially you navigate to the changes in GitHub and click a line number which then opens a quick comment dialog where your comment is then persisted inline. There is also a comment area at the very bottom of the commit diff screen so you can make an overall comment. I am not sure who/how the commit comments are delivered, so at first as we explore this it would be best to manually send an FYI to the list until we are comfortable with how the notifications work. I added two line comments to my own commit. Here's my last commit to trunk RE ShapeReadWriter: https://github.com/spatial4j/spatial4j/commit/2efcbc3e16a3caa176694a955507911f73441ac8 Can any of you provide some feedback via this mechanism please?
I've created some issues but it seems there is no notification, and hence slim to none peer-commenting. Any thoughts on rectifying that? Figure out how to CC the list?