On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:53 AM, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday 15 July 2010 14:47:05 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> Now, going forward, I'd like to keep the good things about this and improve >> what's currently suboptimal. Obviously, I'd like the same workflow for all >> contributions, regardless of whether they're Trolls or not. Let's go step >> by step. I will post a reply to this email with each step and changing the >> subject so as to organise the thread. > > This is something that works quite well, so we're not willing to let it go. > All changes must be unit-tested before being accepted, period. > > Now, what can be improved is the organisation of the staging areas. Right now, > we have 6 of them in 4.7, some very active (oslo-1 and 2), some very quiet > (multimedia) and one with a very specific purpose (merging 4.6 into 4.7). The > effect of this is that we've started to abuse the quiet areas for pushing > important changes, though in retrospect we should have just created a "fast- > track staging area".
A question: is resource usage for the various staging areas assigned dynamically based on need, or is there a dedicated set of resources assigned to each staging area? If it is the latter, perhaps making it assign resources automatically (if feasible) might help. -Todd _______________________________________________ Opengov mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-labs.org/listinfo/opengov
