IMO, I wouldn't mind draconian reverts in the interest of keeping the tree open and allowing the sheriffs some semblance of productivity.
OTOH, git makes it really easy for me to un-revert and try again, so maybe I'm biased there. - a On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Eric Seidel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Could we just automate rollouts and this "5-minute timer"? If we have > the tools to do automated rollouts, would it be reasonable to add them > as a phase in the buildbot? > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Nicolas Sylvain <[email protected]> wrote: >> +1 >> >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Avi Drissman <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I'm OK with that. >>> >>> Just make it clear that the sheriff does have authority. One time when I >>> was sheriff I wanted to revert a broken patch. The author insisted on >>> patching it over and over. He finally got it working about about seven >>> patches and nearly three hours or so, when I was insisting on backing it out >>> after the first 30m. >> >> Yes, this is exactly what we want to avoid. >> The 2-minute rule usually includes: >> "Oops, I forgot to commit a file" >> "Let me disable the test I just added, it clearly does not work" >> "Oops, before committing I renamed a variable and forgot to change it at one >> place" >> It also use to mean: >> "Oops, I forgot an include". But this one has been biting us to much in the >> past, so I leave it at the discretion of the sheriff. >> I think people need to use their good judgement too. The length of a minute >> should be inversely proportional to the number of people trying to commit >> during this time of the day. >> Nicolas >>> >>> Avi >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Peter Kasting <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Ojan Vafai <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> To be clear, here's the proposed policy: Any change that would close the >>>>> tree can be reverted if it can't be fixed in <2 minutes. >>>> >>>> How about: >>>> If a change closes the tree, the change author has 1 or 2 minutes to >>>> respond to a ping. The change should be reverted if the author doesn't >>>> respond, if he says to revert, or if he does not say he has a fix within >>>> the >>>> next 5 minutes. >>>> I can't fix _any_ problem in 2 minutes. But I can fix most of them in 5. >>>> The goal is to allow the author a reasonable chance to fix trivial >>>> problems >>>> before we revert. And I think the tree should go ahead and close during >>>> that interval. >>>> PK >>>> >>> >> >> >> > >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
