On Sep 24, 2011, at 4:27 AM, Graham Percival wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 09:43:01PM -0400, Colin Campbell wrote: >> Instead, we present a special, one time only, batch as >> requested by Mike Solomon. > > Am I correct that these have not been checked by James? I don't > think we should call this a "countdown". By all means suggest > that people review patches, but if they patch hasn't reached > patch-review under the normal procedures, I don't think it should > be called a countdown. >
Then they should not be put on a countdown - I'm not sure which patches of mine will be review-ready by the time Colin sends out his weekly e-mail. I ask him to please put all of these on the countdown, and it is up to him which ones to put on the countdown or not. I am not sure what the normal procedures are, but I'm positive he is, and he makes the decision accordingly (see below). > oh, and Mike: please stop asking for special favors for your > patches. I'm not sure what you mean. I have sent Colin 7 e-mails regarding my patches. Here is the breakdown for every one of them: 7/21: E-mail with 5 patches. Next countdown: 1 patch. 7/25: E-mail with 3 patches. Next countdown: 3 patches. 8/5: E-mail with 5 patches: Next countdown: 0 patches. 8/9: E-mail with 4 patches. Next countdown: 3 patches. 8/14: E-mail with 8 patches. Next countdown: 2 patches put. 8/25: E-mail with 7 patches. Next countdown: 2 patches put. 9/22: E-mail with 5 patches. Next countdown: 5 patches put. As you can see from the tallies above, whenever Colin does not want to put one of my patches on a countdown for whatever reason (too many other patches, not patch-review at the time he makes his batch, whatever) he doesn't. The only response I've ever gotten back from him on this subject is: -snip- This is very helpful, Mike. Do these patches have tracker issues or are they just on Rietveld? ALso, do you use more than one ID on Rietveld? I had a look last night, searching under mts...@gmail.com and saw only closed issues, but maybe I set the parameters wrongly? At any rate, I'll blend these into the next couple of patch batches. You've certainly had a productive Summer, Mike! Cheers, Colin -snip- I would like to continue doing this, as it helps make sure that none of my patches fall through the cracks, it allows me to tell Colin which patches are the most important and which ones can wait, and I get the sense that it is helpful for Colin. However, I also get the sense that from your comment above that you do not feel it is appropriate. Could you elaborate further on what would be a better way to go about this? > Everybody (other than me) works hard on their stuff. > When you've made a new version of a patch, change the > code.google.com issue to Patch-new, and then the updated patch > will go through the system again. > I only do this when there are substantive changes (and when I remember to do it - I forget sometimes, as you point out below). For example, if during a countdown someone recommends changing a regtest and I throw a patch up with the new regtest so that I can download the unified diff to apply to master, I don't check off patch new. Anytime that I feel a change is big enough to merit going through the system again, I let Colin know (as you saw from this week's countdown for both the SpanBar and the TupletBracket patch). > Making git-cl do this automatically will take about 30 minutes of > python hacking. Unfortunately, I only have 60 minutes left for > this week, and I should reserve those for emails and fixing the > darwin-ppc release problem that only I or Jan can fix. > > >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5050046/ (no issue #) > > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1921 > >> http://codereview.appspot.com/5067041/ (no issue #) > > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1922 > >> http://codereview.appspot.com/4961041/ (i imagine that it'll be pulled off >> by someone, but at least it'll get people looking at it! > > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1923 > > >> http://codereview.appspot.com/4917046/ (i decided not to push this one >> because joe had some reservations - i think i've addressed them, but i'd >> like it to go through another countdown) > > Thanks for this. The appropriate action is to change it to > patch-new, and if James thinks it looks good, it will become > patch-review. > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1846 > >> http://codereview.appspot.com/4808082/ (it'll be this patch's 6th >> go-around! i want to throw it back up because i haven't heard any >> responses either way about the newest batch of changes)" > > ditto. > > - Graham > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-devel mailing list > lilypond-devel@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
