Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2011
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:35:12AM -0500, David Golden wrote: > On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org> wrote: > > and if any step fails, report back (how?) and flag the commit (how?) as not > > actually ready. > > maybe cherrymaint needs a "Failed" or "Needs work" status -- meaning > "approved, but failed to apply". > > I agree with Tux that the last approver shouldn't be expected to do > the work. We'll just see things stall at 2 that way. I think the > original proposer should be the one to do the work. There's been times a note would have been useful. eg. I voted up d9bf0e0 because it fixes a test failure introduced in 30fcd6c (which was already cherry-picked), adding a note for that would have been useful. TonyThread Previous | Thread Next