On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 09:11:25AM +1000, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 at 06:13, Sandro Santilli via QGIS-PSC > <qgis-...@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > On June 21, 2024 11:14:59 AM GMT+02:00, "Jürgen E. Fischer via QGIS-PSC" > > <qgis-...@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > >On Fri, 21. Jun 2024 at 10:22:14 +0200, Sandro Santilli wrote: > > >> It's packaging time today but I still have 5 pull requests pending > > >> approval reviews: > > >> > > >> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pulls/strk > > > > > >As far as I can tell none of those are fixes for user facing bugs. > > > > 4/5 actually are. One has been now merged by now, btw, so 3/4 are now. > > Am I looking at a different PR queue? There's 4 open, 2 of which are > marked as draft and not ready for review (marked as draft by YOU), and > one of which is clearly just an improvement for running tests locally.
The draft are so becuase they are using the improvement one, which is not only for running tests locally but it is for testing access to PostgreSQL database as a user with restricted privileges. I've updated its title to reflect what kind of improvements it has: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/57802 I do see the problem with PRs changing titles, yes, but it's a side-product of the slow review process, because I often find myself with stumbling upon a dozen bugs and trying to find a good approach to deal with the PR gate (should I file 12 PRs or a single one?). Based on the assumption that a PR changing a lot of things would be even harder to review, I usually aim at a smaller-focused PR, which in the case at hand is "improve PostgreSQL test data bootstrap script". --strk; Libre GIS consultant/developer https://strk.kbt.io/services.html
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
