Re: Relaxed STATUS voting rules for experimental features?

From: Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 19:24:37 +0000

Branko Čibej wrote on Mon, 12 Feb 2018 23:11 +0100:
> Backporting experimental features isn't crucial, surely? Yet if there
> are changes in trunk, they _might_ affect other code; in that case, more
> eyes is better.

So perhaps something like 'two +1s and one "I verified no non-
experimental code is affected"'. There were some shelving-related
nominations in the past weeks that I would have easily been able to cast
the latter vote for, but not the former.

The thinking here is to have a three-man rule for the "Stable features
aren't affected" part but a two-man rule for the "Changes to an
experimental feature" part.
Received on 2018-02-13 20:24:44 CET

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Thomas Quinot: "[PATCH] Virtual host mode with user name in URL"
Previous message: Daniel Shahaf: "Re: [PATCH] Better error message for svn bindings import in mailer.py."
In reply to: Branko Čibej: "Re: Relaxed STATUS voting rules for experimental features?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]