On 10/02/2014 05:48 PM, Miklos Vajna wrote:
1) Developer pushes to gerrit, somehow marking the change as "I'm
already confident with this, just pushing to gerrit so that I can do
build verification".
2) Build verification happens.
3) If the change is "marked somehow", then it also gets automatically
merged.
Question is what would be the best to mark these changes. Should we use
a specially named "topic" for these changes, and reserve that name for
this purpose? Or should the developer just +2 the change? I'm open to
suggestions.
However it can be implemented in gerrit, I very strongly favor a
mechanism where committing for verification is a single command line
step (that doesn't "cheat" by involving an obligatory client-side script
to make it a single command invocation).
(As far as I see you can't trigger buildbot verification on draft changes,
also, then it wouldn't be possible to easily see such pending changes of
others, I guess.)
For 2) and 3), I guess that's not really a problem, once we agree on how
to mark these "just to be verified" changes, then a simple script can
trigger buildbot verification for the "to be verified" changes, and at
the same time can merge he verified ones (let's say the script would
listen to the gerrit change stream, or so).
Sorry, I don't get what "that" is in "I guess that's not really a problem."
Stephan
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
