[webkit-dev] Frustrated at inconsiderate behavior

[Jeremy Orlow]

On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Oliver Hunt <oliver at apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Jul 7, 2010, at 7:16 PM, Tony Gentilcore wrote:
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> What do you mean by subvert the queue?  The commit queue is a tool to
> streamline commits from contributors who do not have commit access to the
> repository.  If you have the ability to commit you should not be using the
> commit queue to land your patches.
>

That is the opinion of a few contributors, yes.  But even when there were
some big downsides to committers using the commit queue, there was
definitely no definitive direction to not use the queue.  And now that
pretty much all the problems with the queue have been systematically
eliminated, I would argue that--if anything--we should actually ask everyone
to use the queue when practical.

J
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20100708/409ab2dc/attachment.html>