Re: PATCH: Countdown to 20111027

[David Kastrup]

Colin Campbell <address@hidden> writes:

> A couple of points for clarity, then:
>
> Procedurally, I gather that the patch meister doesn't really care
> whether a patch is on /staging or /master, only that Patchy has
> checked it, and that there are no howls of protest in the discussion
> on Rietveld or the various lists, before marking it for countdown, and
> eventually for pushing.  However, the first point above is ambiguous:
> if a patch only gets to staging by way of a countdown, then wanting it
> pushed immediately is moot.  If, on the other hand, the immediate push
> is the criterion, then the countdown is moot.  I had the impression
> that staging was for potentially disruptive patches, those which might
> cause large-scale weeping and wailing, and so should go into a sort of
> extra sanity check before going onto master.
>
> Given that the Bug Squad verify patches with current GUB, can we label
> patches which are fixed in /staging differently from those which are
> fixed in GUB, so that a patch marked "fixed" is assumed *not* to be in
> the GUB build?  This might be a developer error, simply forgetting to
> update the tag, but it could also mean the patch is not yet in the
> publicly available rele4ase.

If stuff goes through staging always, it saves the master meister the
hassle of having to rebase staging on master before being able to push.

I guess we are still in the process of finding out best policies.

-- 
David Kastrup