-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 21.09.2013 14:39, [email protected] wrote: > ----- Original Nachricht ---- Von: "Dr. Trigon" > <[email protected]> An: [email protected] > Datum: 21.09.2013 09:59 Betreff: Re: [Pywikipedia-l] Pywikibot > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 You need the hold >> the promise you have given in [1]: "I will update documentation >> in mediawiki.org after merge" >> >> [1] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/84006/ >> >> You (still) have to update 'externals/__init__.py' and/or >> 'externals/README' in order to keep everything consistent and >> documented. >> >> >> But I am wondering WHY we have a "review" process when we ignore >> issues mentioned there? This is just one example, I encountered >> several others users doing the same since change to GIT (myself >> included honestly)... And I am wondering that nobody seams to >> have a problem with that...?!? > > an example for review process: > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/81959/ > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/81954/ > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/81902/ > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/81963/ > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/84227/ > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/84350/ > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/84532/ > > Where is the point? > > Anyway I agree with self reviewing trivial changes (only). When I > reviewed #84006 there was neighter a veto (CR-2) nor a CR-1 > approval request. And I missinterpreted your V+1 as aggreement with > that commit. There was a reminder for the documentation and btw it > was unclear for me what has to be documented for binding BD to the > framework and at least no file of that merged changes where > affected by the doc request. It was easyer to me to merge it in a > second commit which is now done by DrTrigon [1] (thanks).
This was just the commit that triggered my mail, as mentioned I encountered that several times before already... To some extend I might be a little bit dissapointed to the way how the review process works, most because of the missing 'fixme' mentioned by someone else already earlier. Finally you are right; the merged changes did not affect the files in the later change and BS had to be dropped in somehow fast since ... well I assume everybody was waiting for it to appear again. ;) Yes, my +1 was missunderstanding... I agree. May be we should agree on something like; merge only after 3 independent +1 and no -1 ... or something like this? Thanks and Greetings DrTrigon -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlI+59oACgkQAXWvBxzBrDDk4wCg4uCGTDFSG7OdTFc+Ynbg5jZI 4ooAn22QBxTB5Cc+Xd8rDqLQMmSM5A2j =5HGJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Pywikipedia-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikipedia-l
