> On Jul 9, 2014, at 7:46 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]> wrote: > > What things need to be done in addition to using 'webkitbot rollout’ to meet > a sufficient standard of notification? I assume based on your comments that > it should: > > (1) Add a comment to the original bug that caused the regression (maybe > something like “this caused regression bug XXX” where XXX is the rollout bug). > (2) Add links to diagnostic information about the problem (e.g. buildbot > results page showing the failure, or website URL illustrating a regression). > They should probably go in the bug reporting the regression, not the original > bug. > > Anything else? It seems like (1) and (2) could be done manually while also > using ‘webkitbot rollout’, and (1) could in principle be done by the bot. > Would you object if someone used ‘webkitbot rollout’ and then did (1) and (2)? > > It is my understanding that doing (1), (2), and 'webkit rollout' doesn't > contradict the previously reached consensus. All I'm stating is doing (1) > and (2) before reverting the patch has been the consensus.
Brady said that (1) is already done: "4 - Commented in the original bug “This is re-opened since this is blocked by bug xxxxx” So it seems like the extra request for people using “webkitbot rollout” is to add diagnostic information to the rollout bug, and wait a reasonable period before cq+ing it. Is that something everyone could live with? Cheers, Maciej
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
