Yeah - to be clear, I had no problem with anything you did, Gilles. I was only 
noting that several of them had positive comments, but they weren’t being 
merged. Hate to see the good work lost or forgotten :-)


> On Nov 6, 2014, at 5:29 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquy...@cisco.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> Actually, I like the PRs; I like the nice github tools for commenting and 
> discussing.
> 
> I'm sorry I haven't followed up on the two you filed for me yet.  :-(
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 6, 2014, at 8:23 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet 
> <gilles.gouaillar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> My bad (mostly)
>> 
>> I made quite a lot of PR to get some review before commiting to the master, 
>> and did not follow up in a timely manner.
>> 
>> I closed two obsoletes PR today.
>> 
>> #245 should be ready for prime time.
>> #227 too unless George has an objection.
>> 
>> I asked Jeff to review #232 and #228 because they are large and/or 
>> objectionable changes.
>> 
>> I asked George to review #262 since it might require some other changes.
>> 
>> #261 is ready for prime time assuming this is the way we agree to go.
>> 
>> If you think i should post patches/links to my branches to the devel mailing 
>> list rather than issuing PR, or i should name my branches rfc/something, 
>> then just let me know.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Gilles
>> 
>> 
>> "Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)" <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 6, 2014, at 6:21 PM, Ralph Castain <rhc.open...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I agree - I sent the note because I see people doing things a bit 
>>>> differently than expected. I have no issue with PRs for things where 
>>>> people want extra eyes on something before committing, or as part of an 
>>>> RFC. Just want to ensure folks aren’t letting them languish expecting some 
>>>> kind of gatekeeper to merge them…as that will never happen.
>>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> The wiki actually specifically mentions this use case (PR's against master 
>>> for RFCs and extra eyes).  But it would be good to clarify that there is no 
>>> gatekeeper for these PRs like there is in ompi-release.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Jeff Squyres
>>> jsquy...@cisco.com
>>> For corporate legal information go to: 
>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> de...@open-mpi.org
>>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>> Link to this post: 
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/11/16263.php
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> de...@open-mpi.org
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>> Link to this post: 
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/11/16264.php
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquy...@cisco.com
> For corporate legal information go to: 
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post: 
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2014/11/16265.php

Reply via email to