Paul Wise:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 1:53 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
>> """
>> Migration status: OK: Will attempt migration (Any information below is
>> purely informational)
>> """
>
> I'd remove the "OK:" from that unless there is a reason for it?
>
The current list of messages that can appear after "Migration status:" are:
> VERDICT2DESC = {
> PolicyVerdict.PASS:
> 'OK: Will attempt migration (Any information below is purely
> informational)',
> PolicyVerdict.PASS_HINTED:
> 'OK: Will attempt migration due to a hint (Any information below is
> purely informational)',
> PolicyVerdict.REJECTED_TEMPORARILY:
> 'WAITING: Waiting for test results, another package or too young (no
> action required now - check later)',
> PolicyVerdict.REJECTED_WAITING_FOR_ANOTHER_ITEM:
> 'WAITING: Waiting for another item to be ready to migrate (no action
> required now - check later)',
> PolicyVerdict.REJECTED_BLOCKED_BY_ANOTHER_ITEM:
> 'BLOCKED: Cannot migrate due to another item, which is blocked
> (please check which dependencies are stuck)',
> PolicyVerdict.REJECTED_NEEDS_APPROVAL:
> 'BLOCKED: Needs an approval (either due to a freeze, the source suite
> or a manual hint)',
> PolicyVerdict.REJECTED_CANNOT_DETERMINE_IF_PERMANENT:
> 'BLOCKED: Maybe temporary, maybe blocked but Britney is missing
> information (check below or the buildds)',
> PolicyVerdict.REJECTED_PERMANENTLY:
> 'BLOCKED: Rejected/introduces a regression (please see below)'
> }
When I wrote the messages, I wanted to quickly high light the three
basic states ("OK", "WAITING" or "BLOCKED"/rejected). The first two
states implies that the contributor does not need to do anything at the
moment, where as the letter implies that the some human intervention is
needed.
>> So changing the wording to the proposed will simply make it redundant
>> with the first line. Perhaps we should simply remove that line now?
>
> That seems reasonable to me.
>
Ok, will look at that when we have talked about the part above.
Thanks,
~Niels
