[webkit-dev] Frustrated at inconsiderate behavior

[Tony Gentilcore]

On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Mo, Zhenyao <zhenyao at gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe I should complain this in a different threads, but recently the
> commit bot waiting time is way too long.  Several times a patch of mine got
> the r+ and cq+ and it landed two days later.  This is really frustrating.
>
> I am very tempted to use svn directly to commit patches, but that means the
> patch only gets tested in my local environments. Like one time my patch
> breaks the leopard bot, turns out the failed test is skipped on leopard,
> which is exactly my OS.  If I land it through the commit bots, I could
> identify the issue earlier.
>

I agree they are closely related. A greener tree means a faster commit queue
and a faster commit queue means less people subvert it and break the tree.
The hard problem is figuring out how to fix the incentives so subverting the
queue isn't so desirable.

There is also a smaller but more concrete problem. Older bugs cut in front
of newer bugs in the commit queue. So when the queue is moving slowly,
patches with recent bug IDs could spend a long time getting bumped before
finally landing.
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41791


>
> If there is any way to improve the situation, I'd really appreciate it.
>
> mo
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Adam Barth <abarth at webkit.org> wrote:
>
>> If you're tired of my complaining about the tree being red, you can
>> skip this message.
>>
>> Today Alexey checked in <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/62576>,
>> which broke two tests on every port.  12 hours later, these failures
>> remained in the tree until I cleaned them up.  This mess could have
>> been avoided in a number of ways:
>>
>> 1) He could have run-webkit-tests before committing his change.
>> 2) If he didn't have time to run the tests locally, he could have used
>> the commit-queue to run-webkit-tests before it landed his patch.
>> 3) He could have looked at the tree when sheriff-bot informed him that
>> he might have broken Leopard Intel Debug by pinging him in #webkit and
>> commenting on his bug:
>> <https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41156#c8>.
>>
>> Is this acceptable behavior?
>>
>> http://webkit.org/coding/contributing.html clearly says to "run the
>> layout tests using the run-webkit-tests script and make sure they all
>> pass."  That page also says:
>>
>> [[
>> In either case, your responsibility for the patch does not end with
>> the patch landing in the tree. There may be regressions from your
>> change or additional feedback from reviewers after the patch has
>> landed. You can watch the tree at build.webkit.org to make sure your
>> patch builds and passes tests on all platforms. It is your
>> responsibility to be available should regressions arise and to respond
>> to additional feedback that happens after a check-in.
>> ]]
>>
>> Are there consequences for breaking these rules?
>>
>> Adam
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20100707/89f1c500/attachment.html>