[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: why was this pushed?

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: why was this pushed?
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 12:01:21 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 8:15 PM David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >> We don't push until the status becomes Push.  Countdown is a last
>> >> chance for reviewers to comment.
>> >
>> > Sorry, I saw Valentin had pushed his, so I assumed this was OK.
>> But it was an issue by someone else.  Pushing changes of someone else
>> prematurely when they have not explicitly asked for it bereaves even the
>> original author of the ability to reconsider.
> ?
> David Grant doesn't have push access; there is no circumstance under
> which he would push this change himself.

That's why I wrote: "when they have not explicitly asked for it".  It is
not only the repository server you can explicitly ask for such actions,
we have responsive humans as well.

Contributors without push access are usually asked for a git-formatted
patch by the Patch meister when he sets the final "push" state on a
patch.  This makes sure that both patch content and commit message
accurately reflect what the contributor intends to end up in the
repository.  Such last-minute polishings are frequent enough that we
don't push Rietveld patches to master but have a separate staging branch
where the final authoritive tests are being performed.

David Kastrup
My replies have a tendency to cause friction.  To help mitigating
damage, feel free to forward problematic posts to me adding a subject
like "timeout 1d" (for a suggested timeout of 1 day) or "offensive".

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]