The queue is out of control again. :( https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa... I've tried. But I just can't bring it down alone. :( It's full of lots of port and other fringe related patches. Many of which need to be r-'d. -eric
We're down to 60 now. 84 when I started my crusade (shortly before sending the previous mail). https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa... A long way to go yet! I think I'm tuckered out for the evening. -eric On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Eric Seidel <eric@webkit.org> wrote:
The queue is out of control again. :(
https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa...
I've tried. But I just can't bring it down alone. :( It's full of lots of port and other fringe related patches. Many of which need to be r-'d.
-eric
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Eric Seidel<eric@webkit.org> wrote:
We're down to 60 now. 84 when I started my crusade (shortly before sending the previous mail). https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa... A long way to go yet! I think I'm tuckered out for the evening.
If there is anything Maxime and I can do to help with the Haiku patches, let me know. I believe all the remaining patches have been run through the cpplint script so there should not be any code violations. The GSoC is ending within 10 days or so and it would be nice if these patches could be committed by then. I don't have time tonight but I'll check the remaining patches as best I can tomorrow to be sure they look OK. I know you guys are busy and probably inundated with patches so I don't want all the various Haiku patches to be a burden. It just takes a lot of code to add a new platform to WebKit, as you all probably know. -- Regards, Ryan
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Ryan Leavengood <leavengood@gmail.com>wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Eric Seidel<eric@webkit.org> wrote:
We're down to 60 now. 84 when I started my crusade (shortly before sending the previous mail).
https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa...
A long way to go yet! I think I'm tuckered out for the evening.
If there is anything Maxime and I can do to help with the Haiku patches, let me know. I believe all the remaining patches have been run through the cpplint script
I just start looking at my second one and then stopped after noticing issues that would be caught automatically by check-webkit-style. With that in mind, here's some ideas that I hope you find helpful: 1. Make sure they all pass check-webkit-style. We didn't have this when you started, and it still is getting adopted. so it is understand that they don't pass. However, it will find a number of issues for you (and shorten the back and forth). Note that this tool will miss a lot of things as well. 2. Do a visual inspection of the patches using the formatted diff in bugzilla just for general formatting. 3. I suspect that Maxime and you have learned a lot about WebKit style through the reviews. It would be good to review your own patches with this new knowledge to see if you see anything to fix. To help reviewers know what is ready, obsolete any patches that fail any of these steps and finish all steps before putting the r? on it. Thanks, Dave
I went through every patch in the queue again today (obviously others have been looking too, thank you!). We're down to 29 now! Huzzah! We're having quality control/patch-spam issues from WinCE, Haiku and Gtk-bindings contributers at the moment. Hopefully those will resolve themselves over time as the contributers get more up-to-speed on our process. I encourage other reviewers to actively r- bad patches, and try and educate the contributers instead of letting them rot in the queue. :) We also definitely need to fix our tools to make it impossible to post a patch w/o a ChangeLog, and impossible to post a patch that doesn't pass check-webkit-style. -eric On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Eric Seidel <eric@webkit.org> wrote:
We're down to 60 now. 84 when I started my crusade (shortly before sending the previous mail). https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa...
A long way to go yet! I think I'm tuckered out for the evening.
-eric
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Eric Seidel <eric@webkit.org> wrote:
The queue is out of control again. :(
https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa...
I've tried. But I just can't bring it down alone. :( It's full of lots of port and other fringe related patches. Many of which need to be r-'d.
-eric
I should also note, that kudos to the Haiku folks, the patches have gotten better (and smaller!) even over the last 24 hours after a few rounds of r-'ing -eric On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Eric Seidel <eric@webkit.org> wrote:
I went through every patch in the queue again today (obviously others have been looking too, thank you!). We're down to 29 now! Huzzah! We're having quality control/patch-spam issues from WinCE, Haiku and Gtk-bindings contributers at the moment. Hopefully those will resolve themselves over time as the contributers get more up-to-speed on our process.
I encourage other reviewers to actively r- bad patches, and try and educate the contributers instead of letting them rot in the queue. :)
We also definitely need to fix our tools to make it impossible to post a patch w/o a ChangeLog, and impossible to post a patch that doesn't pass check-webkit-style.
-eric
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Eric Seidel <eric@webkit.org> wrote:
We're down to 60 now. 84 when I started my crusade (shortly before sending the previous mail). https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa...
A long way to go yet! I think I'm tuckered out for the evening.
-eric
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Eric Seidel <eric@webkit.org> wrote:
The queue is out of control again. :(
https://bugs.webkit.org/buglist.cgi?field0-0-0=flagtypes.name&type0-0-0=equa...
I've tried. But I just can't bring it down alone. :( It's full of lots of port and other fringe related patches. Many of which need to be r-'d.
-eric
On Friday 07 August 2009 05:51:57 pm Eric Seidel wrote:
We also definitely need to fix our tools to make it impossible to post a patch w/o a ChangeLog, and impossible to post a patch that doesn't pass check-webkit-style.
This is a bad idea. check-webkit-style still has false positives and is very new. It has been designed to never be free of false positives in fact. Adam
Adam Treat wrote:
On Friday 07 August 2009 05:51:57 pm Eric Seidel wrote:
We also definitely need to fix our tools to make it impossible to post a patch w/o a ChangeLog, and impossible to post a patch that doesn't pass check-webkit-style.
This is a bad idea. check-webkit-style still has false positives and is very new. It has been designed to never be free of false positives in fact.
Not to mention there will always be places where human judgement overrides the guidelines. Joe
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Joe Mason <joe.mason@torchmobile.com> wrote:
Adam Treat wrote:
On Friday 07 August 2009 05:51:57 pm Eric Seidel wrote:
We also definitely need to fix our tools to make it impossible to post a patch w/o a ChangeLog, and impossible to post a patch that doesn't pass check-webkit-style.
This is a bad idea. check-webkit-style still has false positives and is very new. It has been designed to never be free of false positives in fact.
Not to mention there will always be places where human judgement overrides the guidelines.
Also, sometimes a patch is being posted not to be submitted, but to share code to get early feedback on something. Requiring no style lint errors for that use case seems overly restrictive.
Joe
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
participants (6)
-
Adam Treat
-
David Levin
-
Eric Seidel
-
Joe Mason
-
Michael Nordman
-
Ryan Leavengood