On Wednesday, July 9, 2014, Brady Eidson <<a href="mailto:beidson@apple.com">beidson@apple.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Jul 9, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rniwa@webkit.org');" target="_blank">rniwa@webkit.org</a>> wrote:</div><div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
<br></div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">
Again, im not requesting anything new here. The consensus on webkit-dev has been to ping the author/reviewer on IRC or via email and comment in the original bug PRIOR to using webkitbot to start reverting the patch.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I went through the first handful of emails on that thread. The original request that wasn’t meeting a lot of opposition before I stopped digging through the thread was:</div><div>“Please contact the author/reviewer and give them a reasonable amount of time <b>before rolling out their patch</b>.”</div>
<div><br></div><div>I did not reach the message where the consensus was “contact the author and reviewer manually, <b>do not use webkitbot</b>”</div><div><br></div><div>I believe that using webkitbot:</div><div>1 - Comments in a new bugzilla created specifically because there’s an issue</div>
<div>2 - Comments in the original bugzilla notifying of an issue</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It doesn't. The bot only files a new bug, make it a blocker of the original bug, and then reopen the bug.</div>
<div><br></div><div>It doesn't copy over any comments made in the new bug for example.</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>Assuming my webkitbot command contains a description of the reason this patch is suspect, including a URL to the failure, can you further explain why using webkitbot is unreasonable?</div></div></blockquote><div><br>
</div><div>I'm not saying that using webkitbot is unreasonable. I'm saying that the person trying to revert a patch should first inform the author/reviewer first BEFORE start reverting the patch.</div><div><br></div>
<div>Since webkitbot doesn't automatically post the details as to what failures the patch caused, and one line description is almost never adequate (e.g. needs a hyperlink to buildbot page, test failure diff or error log, et c...), I don't see how using webkitbot in its current state could ever be adequate.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Of course, I'm not saying that webkitbot could never be improved to do these things.</div><div><br></div><div> - R. Niwa</div><br><br>-- <br>- R. Niwa<br>