Re: Flaw in our process for dealing with trivial changes
https://github.com/openssl/tools/pull/49 Quite an exercise, I think my python-fu has increased significantly. I have *no* idea how to debug CGI stuff in a sensible way, suggestions welcome! Cheers, Richard On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 12:08:42 +0100, Richard Levitte wrote: > > clacheck modification coming up! > > Cheers, > Richard > > On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 04:48:38 +0100, > Dr Paul Dale wrote: > > > > > > A better example of this problem: #10607. Both Paul and I approved it > > yesterday and I merged it > > today without noticing until too late that it was tagged “CLA: trivial” :( > > I’ve not reverted it at this point but will if necessary. > > > > Let’s get the label in. > > > > Pauli > > -- > > Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations > > Phone +61 7 3031 7217 > > Oracle Australia > > > > On 13 Dec 2019, at 11:02 am, Richard Levitte > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:31:10 +0100, > > Dr Paul Dale wrote: > > > > A red blocker along the lines of: “Triviality Unconfirmed”. One of > > the reviewers needs to remove this before the PR can be merged. > > > > It’s in our face, it prevent accidental merges and its low overhead. > > > > I still think simply adding the label should be sufficient. I dunno > > about you, but I look at labels all the time, for all sorts of > > reasons, and one saying [cla: trivial] would certainly attract my > > attention. > > > > Let's make it bright red-orange, that'll catch anyone's eye (even mine) > > > > Also, removing that label will rapidly be annoying as soon as someone > > closes and re-opens a PR... or whatever other action that triggers > > the "pull_request" event (and there's a lot that does that... our > > script is being kept busy!). > > > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > > -- > > Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org > > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/ > > > > > -- > Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/ > -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
Re: Flaw in our process for dealing with trivial changes
clacheck modification coming up! Cheers, Richard On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 04:48:38 +0100, Dr Paul Dale wrote: > > > A better example of this problem: #10607. Both Paul and I approved it > yesterday and I merged it > today without noticing until too late that it was tagged “CLA: trivial” :( > I’ve not reverted it at this point but will if necessary. > > Let’s get the label in. > > Pauli > -- > Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations > Phone +61 7 3031 7217 > Oracle Australia > > On 13 Dec 2019, at 11:02 am, Richard Levitte wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:31:10 +0100, > Dr Paul Dale wrote: > > A red blocker along the lines of: “Triviality Unconfirmed”. One of > the reviewers needs to remove this before the PR can be merged. > > It’s in our face, it prevent accidental merges and its low overhead. > > I still think simply adding the label should be sufficient. I dunno > about you, but I look at labels all the time, for all sorts of > reasons, and one saying [cla: trivial] would certainly attract my > attention. > > Let's make it bright red-orange, that'll catch anyone's eye (even mine) > > Also, removing that label will rapidly be annoying as soon as someone > closes and re-opens a PR... or whatever other action that triggers > the "pull_request" event (and there's a lot that does that... our > script is being kept busy!). > > Cheers, > Richard > > -- > Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org > OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/ > > -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
Re: AW: Flaw in our process for dealing with trivial changes
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 08:58:27 +0100, Dr. Matthias St. Pierre wrote: > > > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:31:10 +0100, > > Dr Paul Dale wrote: > > > > > > A red blocker along the lines of: "Triviality Unconfirmed". One of > > > the reviewers needs to remove this before the PR can be merged. > > > > > > It's in our face, it prevent accidental merges and its low overhead. > > > > I still think simply adding the label should be sufficient. I dunno > > about you, but I look at labels all the time, for all sorts of > > reasons, and one saying [cla: trivial] would certainly attract my > > attention. > > > > Let's make it bright red-orange, that'll catch anyone's eye (even mine) > > > > Also, removing that label will rapidly be annoying as soon as someone > > closes and re-opens a PR... or whatever other action that triggers > > the "pull_request" event (and there's a lot that does that... our > > script is being kept busy!). > > > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > This seems to be implied already by my last proposal, with just one color > changed: ;-) Yes and no... you talked about addrev, which should not be affected by this. -- Richard Levitte levi...@openssl.org OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
