On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 10:51:25AM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
So -- people with commit rights are not the issue:
- can commit directly to master on their own responsibility
(this should be discouraged, except for urgent buildbreaker fixes that save
everyone pain)
Do I see the beginning of some "CWS" process here? Anyway, if the
objective is to avoid build problems, then I think it is completely
misplaced, because:
* no amount of reviewing is going to cover all the configurations people
build with
* most of build problems are on Windows and MacOS X and we do not have
enough people there (c.f. the recent threads regarding testing of
feature/gbuild_*)
* we already have tinderboxes for exactly that reason
- can submit patches for review. Since we intend to assign a "patch pilot" each
week, his patch will be on master after <24 hours, unless there are questions
Why not, if it is not mandatory... But I, for one, am not expecting any
spectacular results.
about it (in which care it is sane to hold back until this is clarified)
- if you want to be faster, team up with someone for mutual review and you can
be as fast as you want
I do not think it is a good idea to start to do that for master commits
wholesale. We have hardly enough people to review fixes for stable
branches.
D.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.