+csit-dev And I asked for this merge :( Agree that -2 is best way forward. Will ask csit-dev folks to follow this practice too from now onwards.
-Maciek > On 18 Oct 2016, at 18:51, Damjan Marion (damarion) <damar...@cisco.com> wrote: > > > Hey Dave, > > It can happen to anybody. I’m the first one who will do the same. > > That’s why I’m suggesting that we stop that practice. “-2” is hard lock which > will prevent merging it in until reviewer revokes it. > > D. > >> On 18 Oct 2016, at 19:29, Dave Wallace <dwallac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Damjan, >> >> My bad -- sorry 'bout that. Not my best day at multi-tasking :-( >> >> For those patches like the csit operational testing patch that I just >> merged, I prefer -2 so everyone can see the status of tests and help out if >> possible. >> >> I agree with Ed, that transparency is very important for community >> development. >> >> Thanks, >> -daw- >> >> On 10/18/16 1:13 PM, Damjan Marion (damarion) wrote: >>> Folks, >>> >>> We just got 1st DO_NOT_MERGE patch merged in. >>> >>> Can we going forward stop this practice, and use “-2” or Drafts instead? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Damjan >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> vpp-dev mailing list >>> vpp-dev@lists.fd.io >>> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> vpp-dev mailing list >> vpp-dev@lists.fd.io >> https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev > > _______________________________________________ > vpp-dev mailing list > vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev _______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
