Speaking of which, I also love the commit bot thing, but IMO when it commits a R+ and CQ+ patch, it submits too much (three) entries to the bugzilla:
1) one cc'ing [email protected] 2) one doing the commit itself 3) and finally marking the bug as FIXED. @Eric, Adam, is there a way to reduce that to two or even on submit to bugzilla ? e.g. merge _1_ and _3_ maybe ... On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jan 5, 2010, at 10:21 AM, Adam Barth wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 9:42 AM, tonikitoo (Antonio Gomes) >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Q) Why doesn't the EWS post a success message? I like positive >>>> re-enforcement. >>>> A) I'm worried about spamming bugs with too many happy status >>>> messages. If we have N ports with EWS bots, we don't want to have N >>>> happy status messages. Eric and I have some ideas for a more passive >>>> success indicator. Once things are running smoothly, we can share >>>> some mocks with the list. >>> >>> I particularly like not spamming bugzilla in case of successful >>> builds, and IMO the code-style bot should not post a message either in >>> case of no errors. >> >> I agree, but this behavior was specifically required by Maciej when we >> brought the bot online. > > s/required/requested/ > >> I'd be happy to change it if that's what >> folks would prefer. One possibility is to incorporate the status >> bubbles directly into bugs.webkit.org directly instead of requiring >> the extension. I find the status bubbles easier to use than hunting >> for the success / failure message when reviewing a patch. > > I think something like the status bubbles would be more useful than the > success comment, though I also find the success comment more useful than > nothing. > > - Maciej > > -- --Antonio Gomes _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
