Mark Phippard wrote on Sun, 27 Mar 2022 14:06 +00:00: > On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 9:53 AM Nathan Hartman <hartman.nat...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 9:46 AM Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 09:35:51AM -0400, Nathan Hartman wrote: >>> > On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 9:05 AM Mark Phippard <markp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 8:50 AM Nathan Hartman >>> > > <hartman.nat...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 7:05 AM Mark Phippard <markp...@gmail.com> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > >> >>> > > >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 7:00 AM Daniel Sahlberg >>> > > >> <daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > Hi, >>> > > >> > It is due to the migration of svn-qavm to the new host as >>> > > >> > requested by ASF Infra. I'll look into it right away, it has been >>> > > >> > on my todo list since last week, sorry! >>> > > >> > /Daniel >>> > > >> >>> > > >> Thanks. We will want it to get this release process completed but in >>> > > >> the near term once this first batch of backports are merged I am >>> > > >> hoping that will make all of the tests on the branch run successfully >>> > > >> again. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Not sure if you're referring to the buildbots here but that's the >>> > > > other broken important thing. I'll try to look into it soon. I think >>> > > > I can get most of the buildbots running by commenting a few lines and >>> > > > renaming a file. >>> > > >>> > > I am sure it would be nice to have the buildbots running if they are >>> > > not, but I will run the tests locally before posting any tarballs so I >>> > > do not feel like I need these to do the release. >>> > > >>> > > I was only referencing our automated backport script which merges >>> > > approved changes. That is not happening at the moment so the branches >>> > > are not being updated with approved changes. >>> > > >>> > > Since the 1.14.x branch currently has test failures when I run locally >>> > > I was just hoping to see a clean run happen so I know we are in better >>> > > shape to start progressing towards a release. >>> > >>> > Last night I ran the tests on 1.14.x with the following merged and all >>> > tests passed for me: >>> > >>> > r1877310 r1883355 r1878379 r1883719 r1883722 r1884610 r1881534 >>> > r1883838 r1883989 r1886460 r1886582 r1887641 r1890013 r1889629 >>> > r1892470 r1892471 r1892541 r1894734 r1897449 r1898633 r1899227 >>> > >>> > So hopefully all those (or the subset that fixes the broken tests) >>> > will be approved and merged soon... >>> >>> Anyone should feel free to merge+commit approved changes. >>> I have often bypassed the backport merge bot while doing RM work. >>> This bot is just a nice-to-have convenience and its absence should not >>> prevent us from making progress. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Stefan >> >> Thanks for mentioning that. I secretly planned to do exactly that if we >> didn't get svn-role working in time. Now if it comes to that, I won't have >> to feel bad about it. :-) > > I would like to give at least this week for people to cast votes so we > can get as much into the releases as possible. So I am fine with > giving Daniel or anyone else a little time to get the script running > again, but yeah if we get closer to wanting to roll a release we can > have someone just start doing the backports. > > I do like the consistency the script provides as it makes it a lot > easier to create the CHANGES file and just examine the branch history.
It's not mutually exclusive; someone can run the script locally. I'd recommend to run merge-approved-backport.py without arguments.
