On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 17:32 -0800, Deepak Saxena wrote: > On 7 March 2012 17:29, John Stultz <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 17:04 -0800, Deepak Saxena wrote: > >> On 2 March 2012 16:20, John Stultz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > I think it might also be useful to track the phases of development as: > >> > * Discussion > >> > * Development iteration N > >> > * Queued for release X.Y > >> > * Merged X.Y > >> > >> The question I have is at what granularity do we track this, i.e, > >> does a sub-feature == a patchset? > > > > That's probably a good indicator. If we have more then one patch being > > submitted, its likely complicated enough to warrant some tracking (ie: > > not a simple fix). > > > > That said, patches.linaro.org is nice for exactly this sort of tracking. > > However its a little too broad in the way it does its tracking. I just > > wish there was some way to link patches/patch-bundles to blueprints. > > I don't think the upstream community frowns upon on custom meta tags, > so we could simply add some sort of "Linaro-Blueprint: <ID>" tag...
Actually, they DO. I was just scolded today for sending on a patch from the Android tree that included a gerrit "Commit-id:" tag. thanks -john _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~linaro-project-management Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~linaro-project-management More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
