On 11/08/14 03:10, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote:
>On Monday 11 August 2014 00:09:59 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: >> > You're missing the obvious: there was a change and people were not >>ready >> > for it. >> >> that's hardly an argument, given that everybody who paid any attention >> at all knew that it would be *somehow* quite different (due to the >> different branching model). > >That's the entire argument. You can't dismiss it. Of course it would be >different, but without communication explaining how it would happen, >everyone >assumed it would be close to the previous procedures. > >But let's move on. What's done is done and we've learnt the lesson: >communication. Yes. I am not saying it was wrong neither. It was simply a small surprise as it happened differently before. Yes, I could have thought that the new branching scheme will make this simpler, but often you tend to forget about it. In any case, the branching seems to have gone with a lot issues than before, as we hoped it would be. So the new branching scheme seems to be improving things :) Cheers, Lars > >> > Which, again, is a change from previous procedure. In past times, as a >> > member of the release team, I had the right to stage things past the >> > feature freeze, to get things integrated that failed due to unrelated >>CI >> > failures and commits that were granted exception from the freeze. >> >> i'll remind you that you did this *after* i explicitly told you not to >> "help" without prior coordination with me. there is a line between >> "being taken by surprise" and "being kinda obstinate". > >I did ping you on IRC for coordination. Since you didn't reply, I >proceeded >according to previous rules. (No, it was not after midnight in your >timezone) > >> > I can't get the CI to tell me if there's anything wrong. Even if I >> > stage now (which I have done), it will run on Monday morning, at a >> > time at which I'll be busy packing. I'll get home in Portland on >> > Tuesday evening UTC, close to midnight Wednesday. That'll be my first >> > chance to see if any of my integrations failed due to CI issues. >> >> and why would any of that be bad? it's not like anything is on fire. you >> can do other things in the mean time, which you totally do have enough >> to choose from. > >It's time lost. Right now, I am 5 hours behind Central European timezone >and I >have some 8-9 hours of overlap with possible reviewers. Once I get back >home, >the overlap reduces to 5-6 hours, minus the time I have to spend doing >the >rest of $DAYJOB. That means I'll have about 4-6 hours for Qt throughout >the >rest of this week. > >-- >Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > >_______________________________________________ >Development mailing list >Development@qt-project.org >http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
