Re: the latest convert-ly fiasco

[Colin Campbell]

On 11-10-25 05:44 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> There are several independent ones.  Since their respective pushability
> depends on the order in which they will get applied, I don't see that
> changing their status to Patch-push or Patch-countdown would be
> appropriate.
>
> You vetoed using dev/staging for preparation of a mergeable sequence of
> independent patches with corresponding automatic convert-ly updates.
>
> Since the automatic updates need to be combined with their respective
> patches for disruptive syntax changes (changes that don't work without
> running convert-ly), I don't see a sensible way around stepping the
> version number in between the patches.
>
> I don't see Rietveld up to the task of reviewing all that suitably.
> I'll prepare such a sequence, but I have no idea how it can make it
> through the policies.

In the interests of 'get it done and make the paper work agree', would 
you and Graham let me know which issues/patches are going through 
slightly different channels?  I gather that most or all of this would be 
Rietveld only, so it's essentially invisible to the policy weeny, but if 
I can stay out of the way, I'd be glad to turn the blind eye.

Colin

--
I've learned that you shouldn't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both 
hands.
You need to be able to throw something back.
-Maya Angelou, poet (1928- )