On 12-01-29 11:04 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Werner LEMBERG<w...@gnu.org> writes:
OK. BTW, I've meant staging, not master. Sorry for the thinko.
Same thing. Once it is in staging, it will move forward
_automatically_ to master potentially within hours unless there is a
compilation/testing error.
Humpf. I wasn't fully aware of this automatism.
OK, will apply manually and test soon.
Thanks. Note that this does _not_ mean regtests and doc builds: we have
automatisms for that. It means running your own files that use this
feature, and reading the docs to see whether the docs as well as the new
incarnation of the feature make sense to you.
Opinions are more important than results here, and results are only
important as _experiences_, namely connected with your own, individual
work.
Don't bother doing the job of the computer. We need that of the human.
Thanks
As an interjection from a semi-human part of the process: I ordinarily
put patches on countdown rather aggressively, with the inent of keeping
them flowing through the system. I could easily restrict countdowns to
those patches which have an explicit LGTM from a senior developer.
Another approach might be to ask developers to flag their especially
critical patches with a "needs LGTM". I'm afraid both would slow the
patch clearing process, but either should give the sort of explicit
review David is seeking.
Colin
--
I've learned that you shouldn't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both
hands.
You need to be able to throw something back.
-Maya Angelou, poet (1928- )
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
