Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 3199 in lilypond: Patch: Uses only unpure-pure containers to articulate unpure-pure relationships.

[lilypond]

Comment #33 on issue 3199 by address@hidden: Patch: Uses only unpure-pure  
containers to articulate unpure-pure relationships.
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3199

"It was never reset" implies some magical fairy.  We don't have magical  
fairies here.  There are two possibilities to arrive at "Patch-countdown":  
one is the Patch meister setting it because sufficient time has passed in  
Patch-review state.  The Patch Meister basically works via timing, not via  
making technical decisions.  The other possibility is setting it back  
_manually_ to Patch-countdown right after Patchy has given its ok.  This  
can be done by the Patch submitter if all of the following apply:
a) there is a pressing need for the patch
b) the change causing the countdown to be interrupted is not a game changer  
needing new review
c) the patch state has been Patch-countdown for the large majority of the  
countdown duration, so it has had a reasonable chance of being viewed as on  
countdown.
d) it has been originally set to Patch-countdown by the Patch Meister, and  
any changes to that state were of short duration and minor nature.

A Patch that is not marked Patch-countdown is _not_ on countdown.  Never  
ever.  Period.  Otherwise our whole review system becomes a mockery.

The status "Patch-push" means "the patch has passed a regular countdown and  
can be pushed with a procedural ok by the Patch Meister".  Nobody _ever_  
puts a patch to "Patch-push" except the Patch Meister.  After a patch has  
been pushed, Patch-push gets reset.

Sometimes there are reasons to bypass procedures on your own  
responsibility.  Bypassing procedures means pushing without a procedural ok  
and taking responsibility for it.  It does not mean lying about the  
procedures and assigning blame to the Patch Meister for things he did not  
do.

If you feel uncomfortable pushing a change that has not been given  
state "Patch-push", the solution is not giving it state "Patch-push" but  
rather not pushing it.

"Patch-push" is a blessing you don't get to bestow on yourself.  If you  
have forgotten to put a patch back to Patch-countdown timely after a minor  
interruption of the countdown, the solution is not to ignore this and push  
anyway, but wait for the next countdown.

There is _no_ point whatsoever raving at the Patch Meister for not putting  
the state of a patch back to Patch-countdown after the patch say changes.   
The decision whether any changes were trivial enough to warrant resuming  
the countdown is a technical decision and out of the league of the Patch  
Meister.

If you don't feel comfortable making this technical decision, then you wait  
for the patch to be put on the next countdown.

All this is common sense if you bother thinking about it and not  
considering everybody else's life to revolve around your workflows and  
eager to spend every waking minute on second-guessing you and your work.

And it is not exactly like this is the first time it has been explained.

--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all  
issue notifications to this address.
You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://code.google.com/hosting/settings