Hi James, On 19/01/13 20:50, James wrote: > Ian. > > On 19 January 2013 17:26, Ian Hulin <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I've just tried my first push to staging so a load of commenting I > added to main.cc for the Guile 2 conversion work didn't get lost. The > patch ran make check and make doc OK locally. > > I followed the instructions in CG 3.4.11 and marked Tracker 1686 > Fixed. �When should I see a thumbs up/thumbs down post on -auto? > > Did I get the process right? > > > > Looking at the tracker, not really. :) >
D'oh!! Sorry to all for getting this wrong. It had already been through a Rietveld review, and the feedback I got was "OK, tweak this bit, but how about pushing to staging so all the comments are preserved". > As far as this ought to have gone (and someone will correct me if I am > wrong) is that a dev uses (for instance) git-cl to upload code to > Rietveld, this sets the tracker to Patch-New and then when someone (i.e. I modified the label to Fixed instead of Patch-New. Sorry. Do I need to do anything so we get a proper audit trail? Cheers, Ian > me) runs Patchy - the suite of scripts to test patches - I will put it > through a full make, make test, make doc and check the reg tests and > then if all that si ok, the scripts set the patch to Patch-review, then > the other devs check rietveld and assuming nothing is bad, the issue > goes to Patch-countdown and the after a few days (countdown being a 'hey > devs, this is going to get permission to be pushed so make sure you have > looked' flag) it will be marked as pushed on the tracker (this is all > handled by one of the non-devs) and then you push it to staging. > > So you sort of skipped the formalities, but at least it was pushed to > staging. > > Then my server runs the merge scripts every two hours - checks to see if > staging is updated, then does a merge, a full make, make test and make > doc again (just to be sure) and then pushes to master. > > > James > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel > _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
