Commit fb83d64eac0a88e7a78e74b713da090c63c1daad in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/branch_6x from Dawid Weiss
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=fb83d64 ]

SOLR-9293: Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.

Commit 7fb72bfe10d84d3419b07a8782418f86ab075a56 in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/master from Dawid Weiss
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=7fb72bf ]

SOLR-9293: Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.

No patch for review first? it's weird this project is officially CTR (not sure where this is declared) yet tons of defacto convention so we're actually RTC. I admit it's tempting to embrace this CTR to just get stuff committed expediently. I hope we all remain open to review comments after-commit.

Commit 7fb72bfe10d84d3419b07a8782418f86ab075a56 in lucene-solr's branch refs/heads/apiv2 from Dawid Weiss
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=7fb72bf ]

SOLR-9293: Solrj client support for hierarchical clusters and other topics marker.

I don't think we have any formal processes (if I understand your acronyms right). To me common sense and trust I have in other people's judgement typically works best. This applies to both when asking for help on solutions I'm not so confident in and when I think there's simply not that much to discuss because the patch/commit is trivial or self-explanatory.

This particular issue was filed by me a good while ago, it doesn't change anything in terms of existing functionality and it patched a functional hole with means that are neither controversial, nor that difficult to understand. I honestly didn't think it was worth bothering people with requests for reviews of something that is, in essence, a trivial extension of existing code.

Obviously you do have the right to speak up if there's something wrong with a commit. And I'm more then willing to revert and reiterate if this is the case.