I was going to wait a month or two before suggesting this, just to make sure I was fully "up to date", but I'll jump in now.
We instituted the policy of patch countdowns and Patchy after the lengthy wait for 2.14.0, which was due to a large number of regression bugs due to patches which either broke the compile, or broke previously-working output. However, even after that, I still pushed some commits directly to staging, bypassing the countdown. Obviously I did this for updating the VERSION when making a release, but I also did it for a few typo fixes as well. Is this still an accepted practice? If not, I suggest that it should be. If I had to formalize it, I'd say something like "if two developers with push ability agree that a fix is trivial and obvious, it can go straight to staging". (please note that I'm not suggesting that anybody should feel obligated to make such typo fixes -- instead, I'm checking that the "door is open". So that if we manage to get 1 or 2 users who are able to fix typos, and those fixes are very obvious, they wouldn't need to wait 2-4 days. In this case, the "two developers" would be "1 mentor, and the release or patch meister".) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
