GNU bug report logs - #73288
Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch

Previous Next

Package: guix-patches;

Reported by: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>

Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 02:39:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #23 received at 73288 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Steve George <steve <at> futurile.net>
Cc: john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com, Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>,
 宋文武 <iyzsong <at> envs.net>, 73288 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#73288: Request for merging "mesa-updates" branch
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2024 10:21:27 +0200
Hello!

Steve George <steve <at> futurile.net> skribis:

> On 02/10/2024 21:53, Sharlatan Hellseher wrote:
> (...)
>> The current queue of branches awaiting for review and merge:
>> | 71408 | python-team         | Fri Jun 07 10:55:25+0200 2024 | Done
>> |
>> | 72959 | fonts-split-outputs | Mon Sep 02 12:55:25+0200 2024 | Open |
>> | 73104 | r-team              | Sat Sep 07 17:55:24+0200 2024 | Open |
>> | 73288 | mesa-updates        | Mon Sep 16 04:38:25+0200 2024 | Open |
>> | 73502 | go-team             | Thu Sep 26 23:40:25+0200 2024 | Open |
>> | 73515 | qt-team             | Fri Sep 27 14:46:24+0200 2024 | Open |
>> | 73558 | wip-gsl-upgrade     | Sun Sep 29 22:33:24+0200 2024 | Open |
>> | 73567 | lisp-team           | Mon Sep 30 15:43:28+0200 2024 | Open |
>> 
> (...)
>> - https://qa.guix.gnu.org/branch/r-team
>> #73104 I've pinged R team members if that branch may be merged, the
>>   changes touch just R packages from CRAN and Bioconductor. QA passed.
> (...)
>
> What's the definition of when a branch looks good for merging? Does
> some % of substitutes have to be achieved, and for which
> architectures?
>
> https://qa.guix.gnu.org/branch/r-team shows 96% for x86_64 which is .4
> % higher than current master [0]. So it's a win by merging it! ;-)
> Seriously, it's also at 96% for aarch64-linux (bordeaux). So "it looks
> good to me".
>
> If that's the case, what prevents this "just" being merged?
>
> Presumably r-team demonstrated their desire for it to be merged by
> opening the merge request ticket. Is it a break in process if someone
> else does it? (rather than waiting for them to respond).

My take is that by filing a “request to merge”, you claim responsibility
for carrying out the work until it’s merged, unless otherwise stated.
To me, R team folks are responsible for merging ‘r-team’ because they’re
the one who know and they haven’t expressed the desire to get it merged
when it’s good on qa.guix (they didn’t click on “auto-merge”, in GitLab
parlance ;-)).

That said, if there’s no feedback from the R team in a timely fashion,
maybe it’s OK to move to the next branch in the queue.

FWIW, I also pinged 宋文武 regarding ‘fonts-split-outputs’.  If we can’t
get it merged real soon, we should probably skip it.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.




This bug report was last modified 199 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.