Re: who is doing patch-review -> patch-countdown

[David Kastrup]

James <address@hidden> writes:

> And if David wants to use his dictator-powers that is his perogative.

I don't have dictator powers for anything except nominally the stable
branch, just a +3 crown of overbearingness.

One might get the impression since I pushed several changes (and
obviously changed them straight from Review to Fixed) recently, but that
was just because the changes were of the kind where there was not really
a point in review because they were functionally equivalent, tested by
Patchy, and without controversial material.

Our rule basically is "if you bypass the proper review process, you
deserve everything you get if there is any problem".

>     And how long shall I wait after getting a LGTM? I'll add a link to
>     the Rietveld issue as suggested by David, but this is a very minor
>     thing...

Currently I don't know what this is about.  At any rate, a LGTM is a
sign of approval from one of the reviewers.  It is an encouragement to
the Patch meister to move the status to countdown.  It is also an
encouragement to the patch submitter that someone agrees with his
reasoning and/or code.

> To you perhaps, but I have no clue. A patch that has had multiple goes
> on a test isn't minor, and by the way it only gets multiple goes
> because I happen to have had the space to test the patches when I did,
> I'm all for testing once a day if that will calm things down, but then
> you;d complain that you had to wait so long for a patch to get tested
> i expect.
>
> Come on.

I consider yourself doing a fabulous job so far, so Werner probably just
did not realize that my chaotic patch master interregnum had drawn to a
close.

-- 
David Kastrup