> I actually like it. > If "Evil approval bot" mailed you warning that it will merge 12 pending > changesets in two days if there's no action from your part, that would > force some promptly action by you. >
Not a chance in hell we'll ever allow this for the operations repo or the mediawiki deployment branches. > I recently had a trivial patch to operations/puppet waiting for more > than a month. When I noticed I hadn't added any Reviewer, and added to > it, the changeset was fixed in the same day. But that also shows that > nobody looked for new changes there. > That's because ops tends to be swamped with requests constantly. We work mostly on an interruption model. I doubt we'll change our workflow any time soon to check for changes that haven't asked for a review. > I have also seen people approving their own commits to core, something > I'm not comfortable with. > I dislike this, very much. The workflow in ops requires this, but there's no reason it should happen in mediawiki core. > I was also recently unhappy when I discovered that one patch I thought I > had open, had been abandoned without explanation. There can be good > reasons for doing that, this is a bad idea, no longer needed, fixed in a > different way in I123456... or even "closing because it has been waiting > for a new patch for too long and I don't like seeing this open" (which I > suspect was the case), but *please*, if you're closing another people's > patch, leave an explanation! > Indeed. Like bugs, something should never be dropped without saying why. - Ryan _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
