Could we just automate rollouts and this "5-minute timer"? If we have
the tools to do automated rollouts, would it be reasonable to add them
as a phase in the buildbot?
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Nicolas Sylvain <nsylv...@chromium.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Avi Drissman <a...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> I'm OK with that.
>>
>> Just make it clear that the sheriff does have authority. One time when I
>> was sheriff I wanted to revert a broken patch. The author insisted on
>> patching it over and over. He finally got it working about about seven
>> patches and nearly three hours or so, when I was insisting on backing it out
>> after the first 30m.
>
> Yes, this is exactly what we want to avoid.
> The 2-minute rule usually includes:
> "Oops, I forgot to commit a file"
> "Let me disable the test I just added, it clearly does not work"
> "Oops, before committing I renamed a variable and forgot to change it at one
> place"
> It also use to mean:
> "Oops, I forgot an include". But this one has been biting us to much in the
> past, so I leave it at the discretion of the sheriff.
> I think people need to use their good judgement too. The length of a minute
> should be inversely proportional to the number of people trying to commit
> during this time of the day.
> Nicolas
>>
>> Avi
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Peter Kasting <pkast...@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Ojan Vafai <o...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To be clear, here's the proposed policy: Any change that would close the
>>>> tree can be reverted if it can't be fixed in <2 minutes.
>>>
>>> How about:
>>> If a change closes the tree, the change author has 1 or 2 minutes to
>>> respond to a ping. The change should be reverted if the author doesn't
>>> respond, if he says to revert, or if he does not say he has a fix within the
>>> next 5 minutes.
>>> I can't fix _any_ problem in 2 minutes. But I can fix most of them in 5.
>>> The goal is to allow the author a reasonable chance to fix trivial problems
>>> before we revert. And I think the tree should go ahead and close during
>>> that interval.
>>> PK
>>>
>>
>
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
