Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-28 Thread Ivan Sanders
Unsubscribe Sent from my iPhone > On 29 Sep 2013, at 3:17 am, "Mark A. Hershberger" wrote: > > In order to address concerns about the bureaucratic feel of the backport > policy, I've added the following to the page: > > == Do all backports have to go through this process? == > > No. Devel

Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-28 Thread Mark A. Hershberger
In order to address concerns about the bureaucratic feel of the backport policy, I've added the following to the page: == Do all backports have to go through this process? == No. Developers who have commit access can use the “Cherry Pick To” button to backport changes without using this pr

Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-27 Thread Mark A. Hershberger
On 09/27/2013 03:42 PM, Chad wrote: > I agree it's too bureaucratic. In fact, I'd propose we go a completely > different route with backporting. If something needs backporting, it > should land in the old branch first. Then we can occasionally just > merge those branches forward to master. If we ca

Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-27 Thread Chad
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote: > On 09/27/2013 01:52 PM, James Forrester wrote: > > What about for core changes needed by extensions that are widely-desired​ > > (I'm thinking specifically of VisualEditor here, but no doubt there are > > others), where our dependencie

Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-27 Thread Mark A. Hershberger
On 09/27/2013 01:52 PM, James Forrester wrote: > What about for core changes needed by extensions that are widely-desired​ > (I'm thinking specifically of VisualEditor here, but no doubt there are > others), where our dependencies on MW 1.22 alpha (currently > 1.22/wmf11

Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-27 Thread James Forrester
On 27 September 2013 10:36, Mark A. Hershberger wrote: > On 09/27/2013 01:06 PM, Siebrand Mazeland wrote: > > Would it be possible to commit to a "will be > > reviewed within" time for "bugzilla issues with a merged patch in Gerrit > > that are marked as resolved fixed with the 'Backport_stable?'

Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-27 Thread Mark A. Hershberger
On 09/27/2013 01:06 PM, Siebrand Mazeland wrote: > Would it be possible to commit to a "will be > reviewed within" time for "bugzilla issues with a merged patch in Gerrit > that are marked as resolved fixed with the 'Backport_stable?' flag set'? Yes. We'll be reviewing them every two weeks and re

Re: [MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-27 Thread Siebrand Mazeland
On Fri, September 27, 2013 18:41, Mark A. Hershberger wrote: > We've come up with another document for interested people to review: the > Backport policy[1]. > > Just as a process for reviewing RFPs was introduced this year, we've > also set up a way to review requested backports. The first meeti

[MediaWiki-l] Backport policy

2013-09-27 Thread Mark A. Hershberger
We've come up with another document for interested people to review: the Backport policy[1]. Just as a process for reviewing RFPs was introduced this year, we've also set up a way to review requested backports. The first meeting to review these requests is in 2 weeks. In the meantime, have a l