Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-03 Thread Joe Mason

Adam Barth wrote:

On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:13 PM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote:

Either we should change the review process to only set the review+ flag if the 
patch is ready to go with zero modifications, or we should use the commit+ flag 
to signify that.

I could go either way on this.  I don't like the idea of setting review- flags 
for trivial fixes that could be landed with minor modifications.  On the other 
hand, being able to commit patches directly from bugs.webkit.org with 
bugzilla-tool is really handy.


The other factor is that some committers might not want the
commit-queue script to land their changes.  In those cases, their
patches would get an r+ but never get a commit+.  (Personally, I don't
mind if other people want to land may changes, but I can see how it
might disrupt other's workflow.)


Based on this, I suggest calling the flag auto-commit, to make it 
clear that you don't need to set it if you want to commit by hand.


Joe
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-03 Thread Maciej Stachowiak


On Aug 1, 2009, at 8:41 PM, Adam Barth wrote:

On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:13 PM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org  
wrote:
Either we should change the review process to only set the review+  
flag if the patch is ready to go with zero modifications, or we  
should use the commit+ flag to signify that.


I could go either way on this.  I don't like the idea of setting  
review- flags for trivial fixes that could be landed with minor  
modifications.  On the other hand, being able to commit patches  
directly from bugs.webkit.org with bugzilla-tool is really handy.


The other factor is that some committers might not want the
commit-queue script to land their changes.  In those cases, their
patches would get an r+ but never get a commit+.  (Personally, I don't
mind if other people want to land may changes, but I can see how it
might disrupt other's workflow.


I think the flag state should be commit? for requesting a commit,  
and commit+ for a committed patch, to match how we use the review  
flag. That way, either the patch submitter or anyone else who notices  
the patch needs committing and wasn't submitted by a committer can  
flag it, and the state when the patch is landed can be clear.


Regards,
Maciej

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-03 Thread Eric Seidel
OK, per the discussion, I will add a commit-queue=? flag for Adam's testing.
 If we like it, we can keep it.  If not, we can kill it.
-eric

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:


 On Aug 1, 2009, at 8:41 PM, Adam Barth wrote:

  On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:13 PM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote:

 Either we should change the review process to only set the review+ flag
 if the patch is ready to go with zero modifications, or we should use the
 commit+ flag to signify that.

 I could go either way on this.  I don't like the idea of setting review-
 flags for trivial fixes that could be landed with minor modifications.  On
 the other hand, being able to commit patches directly from
 bugs.webkit.org with bugzilla-tool is really handy.


 The other factor is that some committers might not want the
 commit-queue script to land their changes.  In those cases, their
 patches would get an r+ but never get a commit+.  (Personally, I don't
 mind if other people want to land may changes, but I can see how it
 might disrupt other's workflow.


 I think the flag state should be commit? for requesting a commit, and
 commit+ for a committed patch, to match how we use the review flag. That
 way, either the patch submitter or anyone else who notices the patch needs
 committing and wasn't submitted by a committer can flag it, and the state
 when the patch is landed can be clear.

 Regards,
 Maciej


 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


[webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
I've been experimenting with a wrapper for bugzilla-tool that runs in
a loop and tries to land patches [1].  Ideally, there would be enough
information in Bugzilla so I could kick off this script and make tea
while it does its thing.  However, deciding whether a bug with an r+
patch is ready to be landed requires human intervention.

I went through the queue tonight and manually marked the bugs as
commit-ready by adding [commit+] to their titles.  This worked well,
except that it made the bug titles ugly.  I think a better solution is
to have flag analogous to r+ which is commit+.  The flag means I
certify that this patch is ready to be landed according to WebKit
process.  Unlike r+, this flag would be settable by any committer
because it is the moral equivalent of typing svn commit.  In rare
cases, such as unreviewed build fixes, a patch could have commit+
without an r+.

In future, future land when we have a working commit queue, the actual
svn commit command might be run by a bot instead of a human.

Adam

[1] You can see my progress here: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27918
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread tonikitoo (Antonio Gomes)
 I went through the queue tonight and manually marked the bugs as
 commit-ready by adding [commit+] to their titles.  This worked well,
 except that it made the bug titles ugly.  I think a better solution is
 to have flag analogous to r+ which is commit+.

Adam, as I suggedted previously, bugzilla supports KEYWORDs, so that
would be a matter of adding a special support for bugs where patches
are ready to go in.

'checkin-needed' keyword would work , i believe. What do you think ?

these are the currently supported keywords:
https://bugs.webkit.org/describekeywords.cgi


-- 
--Antonio Gomes
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Ojan Vafai
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM, tonikitoo (Antonio Gomes) 
toniki...@gmail.com wrote:

  I went through the queue tonight and manually marked the bugs as
  commit-ready by adding [commit+] to their titles.  This worked well,
  except that it made the bug titles ugly.  I think a better solution is
  to have flag analogous to r+ which is commit+.

 Adam, as I suggedted previously, bugzilla supports KEYWORDs, so that
 would be a matter of adding a special support for bugs where patches
 are ready to go in.


Can keywords be applied to individual patches? This needs to work for bugs
with multiple patches on them.

Ojan
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 8:43 AM, tonikitoo (Antonio
Gomes)toniki...@gmail.com wrote:
 Adam, as I suggedted previously, bugzilla supports KEYWORDs, so that
 would be a matter of adding a special support for bugs where patches
 are ready to go in.

 'checkin-needed' keyword would work , i believe. What do you think ?

In addition to the point Ojan made about applying to individual
patches, a flag also has the advantage that it implicates who approved
the patch to be committed.  Sure, the information is available for
keywords if you dig deep enough, but the system has more
accountability if the name is right there.

Adam
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread David Kilzer

On Saturday, August 1, 2009 10:16:39 AM, Adam Barth wrote:
 On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 8:43 AM, tonikitoo (Antonio Gomes)wrote:
  Adam, as I suggedted previously, bugzilla supports KEYWORDs, so that
  would be a matter of adding a special support for bugs where patches
  are ready to go in.
 
  'checkin-needed' keyword would work , i believe. What do you think ?
 
 In addition to the point Ojan made about applying to individual
 patches, a flag also has the advantage that it implicates who approved
 the patch to be committed.  Sure, the information is available for
 keywords if you dig deep enough, but the system has more
 accountability if the name is right there.


Bugzilla has the ability to create additional 4-state flags at both the 
attachment level and at the bug level.  (Note that bugs.webkit.org does not 
have bug-level flags enabled.)

For example, we could create a commit attachment flag which would have four 
states (just like the review flag):  none, commit?, commit+, commit-.

I'm not sure if this helps or hurts, though it would have made abarth's desired 
workflow much nicer.

Mozilla also uses a superreview flag and various approval flags as seen on 
the attachments on this bug:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342677

Dave

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote:
 Bugzilla has the ability to create additional 4-state flags at both the 
 attachment level and at the bug level.  (Note that bugs.webkit.org does not 
 have bug-level flags enabled.)

 For example, we could create a commit attachment flag which would have four 
 states (just like the review flag):  none, commit?, commit+, commit-.

 I'm not sure if this helps or hurts, though it would have made abarth's 
 desired workflow much nicer.

Yeah, that sounds great.  Should we try that out for a while and see
if it's useful?

Adam
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Jeremy Orlow
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Ojan Vafai o...@chromium.org wrote:

 On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote:

 On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote:
  Bugzilla has the ability to create additional 4-state flags at both the
 attachment level and at the bug level.  (Note that bugs.webkit.org does
 not have bug-level flags enabled.)
 
  For example, we could create a commit attachment flag which would have
 four states (just like the review flag):  none, commit?, commit+,
 commit-.
 
  I'm not sure if this helps or hurts, though it would have made abarth's
 desired workflow much nicer.

 Yeah, that sounds great.  Should we try that out for a while and see
 if it's useful?


 This seems fine to me, except it adds yet another layer of complexity to
 the review process. I think getting patches landed more quickly is probably
 worth it though. This is essentially a slightly more complicated (but easier
 to implement?) version of Maciej's proposal from a few weeks ago to get rid
 of r* and have the following four review states:

 REQUESTED
 DENIED
 APPROVED WITH MODIFICATIONS
 APPROVED


It seems to me that the only difference is APPROVED becomes READY TO LAND
(or LANDABLE or something like that).


Btw, I see one downside to a commit queue:  When you manually commit
something, you're supposed to watch the build bots for breakage.  If the
submit queue is running all the tests on all the platforms then it doesn't
really matter, but if not there'll need to be automated rollbacks when
things break on the waterfall build bots.  This could easily become
complicated if the commit queue can submit multiple patches before the
waterfall bots show green for the previous patch.

I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that tests should either be run
on every buildbot configuration, there needs to be some pretty robust
rollback code, or the queue needs to let everything cycle green before
committing the next patch.  The last suggestion seems like a good start.

Note also that, if the system rolls back a patch and the bots don't go back
to their previous state, the submit bot needs to stop so someone can take a
look manually (so things don't get further hosed).

One benefit over the above is that, I don't think we need to restrict
 commit+ to people with svn commit bit, as long as a patch is r+'ed or r+'ed
 with modifications.

 Ojan

 ___
 webkit-dev mailing list
 webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
 http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread David Kilzer

On Saturday, August 1, 2009 11:45:43 AM, Ojan Vafai wrote:

On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Adam Barth aba...@webkit.org wrote:
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote:
 Bugzilla has the ability to create additional 4-state flags at
 both the attachment level and at the bug level.  (Note that
 bugs.webkit.org does not have bug-level flags enabled.)
 
 For example, we could create a commit attachment flag which
 would have four states (just like the review flag):  none,
 commit?, commit+, commit-.
 
 I'm not sure if this helps or hurts, though it would have
 made abarth's desired workflow much nicer.
 
 Yeah, that sounds great.  Should we try that out for a while
 and see if it's useful?
 
 This seems fine to me, except it adds yet another layer of
 complexity to the review process. I think getting patches
 landed more quickly is probably worth it though. This is
 essentially a slightly more complicated (but easier to
 implement?) version of Maciej's proposal from a few weeks
 ago to get rid of r* and have the following four review
 states:
 
 REQUESTED
 DENIED
 APPROVED WITH MODIFICATIONS
 APPROVED
 
 One benefit over the above is that, I don't think we need
 to restrict commit+ to people with svn commit bit, as long
 as a patch is r+'ed or r+'ed with modifications.


This would require a non-trivial amount of modification to Bugzilla, and it 
would make future upgrades much more difficult.

Basically, Adam's asking for a flag to make it easier for bugzilla-tool to know 
when to land patches without human intervention.  Currently, a committer must 
look at each patch's review comments to make this determination.

Either we should change the review process to only set the review+ flag if the 
patch is ready to go with zero modifications, or we should use the commit+ flag 
to signify that.

I could go either way on this.  I don't like the idea of setting review- flags 
for trivial fixes that could be landed with minor modifications.  On the other 
hand, being able to commit patches directly from bugs.webkit.org with 
bugzilla-tool is really handy.

Dave

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Jeremy Orlowjor...@chromium.org wrote:
 Btw, I see one downside to a commit queue:  When you manually commit
 something, you're supposed to watch the build bots for breakage.  If the
 submit queue is running all the tests on all the platforms then it doesn't
 really matter, but if not there'll need to be automated rollbacks when
 things break on the waterfall build bots.  This could easily become
 complicated if the commit queue can submit multiple patches before the
 waterfall bots show green for the previous patch.

We're a ways from having a fully automated commit queue.  When I run
the commit-queue script, I also watch the bots and clean up manually
as needed.  (So far this hasn't been necessary, but I'm sure it will
be at some point.)

Adam
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev


Re: [webkit-dev] Towards a commit-queue

2009-08-01 Thread Adam Barth
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:13 PM, David Kilzerddkil...@webkit.org wrote:
 Either we should change the review process to only set the review+ flag if 
 the patch is ready to go with zero modifications, or we should use the 
 commit+ flag to signify that.

 I could go either way on this.  I don't like the idea of setting review- 
 flags for trivial fixes that could be landed with minor modifications.  On 
 the other hand, being able to commit patches directly from bugs.webkit.org 
 with bugzilla-tool is really handy.

The other factor is that some committers might not want the
commit-queue script to land their changes.  In those cases, their
patches would get an r+ but never get a commit+.  (Personally, I don't
mind if other people want to land may changes, but I can see how it
might disrupt other's workflow.)

Adam
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev