> On 03/15/16 18:20, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> I don't object to pulling, if the submitter explicitly requests it, and
> if we're making this option official now.
Let's say "at the discretion of the person doing the merge" rather than
writing down that it should need an explicit request.
Over t
1.org] On Behalf Of David
>> Woodhouse
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2016 3:50 AM
>> To: Kinney, Michael D ; Mangefeste, Tony
>> ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
>> Subject: Re: [edk2] EDK2 Staging Repository 2nd Draft
>>
>> On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 00:16 +, Kin
inney, Michael D ; Mangefeste, Tony
> ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Subject: Re: [edk2] EDK2 Staging Repository 2nd Draft
>
> On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 00:16 +, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> >
> >
> > Can you provide some revised text you would like to see in step 6.
>
On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 00:16 +, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
>
>
> Can you provide some revised text you would like to see in step 6.
>
> I agree that we need to use the tools in ways that help make this easy,
> prevent
> errors, and preserve history. Given that step 6 describes promoting a
>
Subject: Re: [edk2] EDK2 Staging Repository 2nd Draft
>
> On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 22:38 +, Mangefeste, Tony wrote:
> > Yes there is work that is substantial enough.
>
> I'm not sure what that's an answer to; you didn't leave a specific part
> of my emai
On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 22:38 +, Mangefeste, Tony wrote:
> Yes there is work that is substantial enough.
I'm not sure what that's an answer to; you didn't leave a specific part
of my email above it as context.
I was saying that *when* work is substantial enough to warrant such
staging, that is
Yes there is work that is substantial enough.
-- Original message--
From: David Woodhouse
Date: Mon, Mar 14, 2016 3:19 PM
To: Mangefeste, Tony;edk2-devel@lists.01.org<mailto:;edk2-devel@lists.01.org>;
Cc:
Subject:Re: [edk2] EDK2 Staging Repository 2nd Draft
On Sat, 2016-03-12 at
On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 00:25 +, Mangefeste, Tony wrote:
>
> 6) Process to promote an edk2-staging branch to edk2 trunk
> a) Request sent to edk2-devel that describes the feature, design,
> testing, etc.
> b) Stewards evaluate request and determine if the feature meets edk2
> c
On Sat, 2016-03-12 at 00:25 +, Mangefeste, Tony wrote:
>
> Problem statement
> =
> Need place on tianocore.org where new features that are not ready for
> product integration can be checked in for evaluation by the EDK II
> community prior to adding to the edk2 trunk. This ser
not edk2 master.
Thanks
Liming
-Original Message-
From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
Mangefeste, Tony
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2016 8:26 AM
To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
Subject: [edk2] EDK2 Staging Repository 2nd Draft
Importance: High
After collecting nu
can be developed
based on edk2 udk branch, not edk2 master.
Thanks
Liming
-Original Message-
From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
Mangefeste, Tony
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2016 8:26 AM
To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
Subject: [edk2] EDK2 Staging Repository
That's a good idea.
-- Original message--
From: Justen, Jordan L
Date: Fri, Mar 11, 2016 5:34 PM
To: Mangefeste, Tony;edk2-devel@lists.01.org;
Cc:
Subject:Re: [edk2] EDK2 Staging Repository 2nd Draft
On 2016-03-11 16:25:39, Mangefeste, Tony wrote:
>
> 6) Process to prom
On 2016-03-11 16:25:39, Mangefeste, Tony wrote:
>
> 6) Process to promote an edk2-staging branch to edk2 trunk
> a) Request sent to edk2-devel that describes the feature, design,
> testing, etc.
> b) Stewards evaluate request and determine if the feature meets edk2
> criteria.
>
After collecting numerous feedback, here's a clean 2nd proposal for review.
* Message format clean
* Approval process updates for stanging -> EDK2 trunk
* The intention of the staging branch is _not_ to work on features that grow to
unreasonable sizes. It is to manage features in an isolated en
14 matches
Mail list logo
