On Jul 7, 2010, at 7:22 PM, James Robinson wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Oliver Hunt <oli...@apple.com> wrote: > > On Jul 7, 2010, at 7:16 PM, Tony Gentilcore wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Mo, Zhenyao <zhen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Maybe I should complain this in a different threads, but recently the commit >> bot waiting time is way too long. Several times a patch of mine got the r+ >> and cq+ and it landed two days later. This is really frustrating. >> >> I am very tempted to use svn directly to commit patches, but that means the >> patch only gets tested in my local environments. Like one time my patch >> breaks the leopard bot, turns out the failed test is skipped on leopard, >> which is exactly my OS. If I land it through the commit bots, I could >> identify the issue earlier. >> >> I agree they are closely related. A greener tree means a faster commit queue >> and a faster commit queue means less people subvert it and break the tree. >> The hard problem is figuring out how to fix the incentives so subverting the >> queue isn't so desirable. > > What do you mean by subvert the queue? The commit queue is a tool to > streamline commits from contributors who do not have commit access to the > repository. If you have the ability to commit you should not be using the > commit queue to land your patches. > > > That's not my understanding of the commit queue. I use the commit queue to > land my patches when possible so that the patch receives further testing > before it hits the tree and potentially affects a large number of > contributors. Why do you think this is a bad idea? Is this preference > codified somewhere (formally or informally)?
Previously the commit queue had a problem whereby it would show incorrect committer information (every patch committed by Eric). Now that is fixed - every patch submitted by a committer will show the proper committer, and those submitted by a non-committer will show up as committed by commit-queue. I think it's a choice of which approach to use. In addition to the obvious benefit of testing your patch for you, I think one positive externality of the commit queue is that people who use it are more motivated to keep the tree green. One negative externality is that it sometimes makes people excessively upset about tree redness, and sometimes makes them want to fix redness in a way that papers over problems (e.g. by adding to the skipped list). On the whole, I suspect the benefits of automated testing before landing probably outweigh these concerns. Regards, Maciej
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
