If you don’t care about building WebKit on Windows, you can stop reading now!
Still here? Okay:
I’m attempting to make the Windows build rely less on the Cygwin tool chain.
There are a number of reasons for this, but one of the major benefits I hope to
derive is to reduce the amount of effort
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:45 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> Again, im not requesting anything new here. The consensus on webkit-de
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Brady Eidson wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:45 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> Since webkitbot doesn't automatically post the details as to what failures
> the patch caused, and one line description is almost never adequate (e.g.
> needs a hyperlink to buildbot page, t
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:45 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> Again, im not requesting anything new here. The consensus on webkit-dev has
>> been to ping the author/reviewer on IRC or via ema
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:45 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> Again, im not requesting anything new here. The consensus on webkit-dev has
>> been to ping the author/reviewer on IRC or via ema
On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa > wrote:
>
> Again, im not requesting anything new here. The consensus on webkit-dev
> has been to ping the author/reviewer on IRC or via email and comment in the
> original bug PRIOR to using webkitbot
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> Again, im not requesting anything new here. The consensus on webkit-dev has
> been to ping the author/reviewer on IRC or via email and comment in the
> original bug PRIOR to using webkitbot to start reverting the patch.
I went through the
On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Brady Eidson > wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:43 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>>
>> When the bug for a rollout is created, the original bug is automatically
>>> reopened.
>>>
>>>
>>> Which makes sense when a patc
On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:43 PM, Ryosuke Niwa > wrote:
>
>
> When the bug for a rollout is created, the original bug is automatically
>> reopened.
>>
>>
>> Which makes sense when a patch breaks something, whether the resolution
>> is the author foll
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:43 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>> When the bug for a rollout is created, the original bug is automatically
>> reopened.
>
> Which makes sense when a patch breaks something, whether the resolution is
> the author following up with a fix *or* the rollout committing.’
>
> Thi
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> When the bug for a rollout is created, the original bug is automatically
> reopened.
This is a long-standing bug in the bot. The original bug should not be reopened
until the change that fixed it is reverted.
__
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Simon Fraser wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Tim Horton
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Ju
On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Tim Horton wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> C
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Tim Horton
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Ju
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Tim Horton wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>>
>>>
>
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Brady Eidson wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Tim Horton
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>
>>
>> Could we teach webkitbot to do an appropriate notification wi
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:39 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Tim Horton wrote:
>
>> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>
>>
>> Could we teach webkitbot to do an appropriate notification with a waiting
>> period? Either as part of rollout or ad
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Tim Horton
wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>
> Could we teach webkitbot to do an appropriate notification with a waiting
> period? Either as part of rollout or add a new command to do it.
>
>
> It already does. The "waiting peri
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>
> Could we teach webkitbot to do an appropriate notification with a waiting
> period? Either as part of rollout or add a new command to do it.
It already does. The “waiting period” is defined by when the person who asked
for the rol
Could we teach webkitbot to do an appropriate notification with a waiting
period? Either as part of rollout or add a new command to do it.
- Maciej
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 11:40 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> Yes. The point is to do these things before telling webkitbot to rollout a
> patch.
>
With any waiting period before actually rolling out?
Simon
On Jul 9, 2014, at 11:40 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> Yes. The point is to do these things before telling webkitbot to rollout a
> patch.
>
> - R. Niwa
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Simon Fraser wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 7
Yes. The point is to do these things before telling webkitbot to rollout a
patch.
- R. Niwa
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Simon Fraser
wrote:
> On Jul 9, 2014, at 7:43 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> This is a friendly remainder that you should
>
>- comment on the associated b
On Jul 9, 2014, at 7:43 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is a friendly remainder that you should
> comment on the associated bug
> email the patch author and the reviewer who reviewed the patch
> before rolling out / reverting a patch.
If you use webkitbot to roll out, is this necessa
Hi all,
This is a friendly remainder that you should
- comment on the associated bug
- email the patch author and the reviewer who reviewed the patch
before rolling out / reverting a patch.
- R. Niwa
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.
Hello WebKittens,
WebKit reviewers recently had a discussion about the large number of
inactive committers and reviewers left after the Blink fork, and we've come
to introduce a new policy to consider committers and reviewers who have not
contributed to the project over one year "*inactive*". In
25 matches
Mail list logo
