launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Max Kanat-Alexander <mkanat@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/11/2010 12:51 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
> We run dedicated branches of our dependencies, so that we can:
>  - review from within our group of 20+ reviewers
>  - react and deploy things promptly

	Yes, of course, that's fine. The branch that you deploy from will still
be ~launchpad-pqm/loggerhead/devel (or whatever you want to call it),
I'm just saying that that you should now be merging 1.18 into that
branch, not trunk, and that it should be continuously safe to merge 1.18
into it without having to ask me if loggerhead is currently stable. You
still can do your own QA before deployment if you'd like.

> Your request above *appears* to put you in as a bottleneck here, which
> is inefficient vs having a large group of reviewers that can be
> tapped. I'd want a very strong reason to do that. Perhaps I'm
> misunderstanding what you're actually asking.

	I'm just asking to be informed about everything that's going into the
branch, so that I can respond and make sure that we really are focusing
only on important stability fixes. I'm not too concerned about the
bottleneck--very few people are currently doing any loggerhead
development besides me.

	What Martin said is accurate, though, too--if I'm not around and
available to review what is obviously something that should be going
into that branch, it should just go in. I don't want to be a
bottleneck--I just want to have the *opportunity* to respond.

> If you can
> propose a merge to Launchpad of a dependency change when a new version
> is ready (see our versions.cfg - its a buildout based approach); then
> check it works on on qastaging (or tell other folk what they need to
> look for and they can qa it) - that will fit in with our processes.

	Okay, but that would be done by somebody other than me--one of the
LOSAs, perhaps, or somebody who works on Launchpad itself. I don't (and
don't really desire) access to any of the proper systems to accomplish
all those things. The details of the Launchpad loggerhead deployment
have always been handled by the LOSAs, and I don't see any reason to
take that away from them.

	-Max
-- 
http://www.everythingsolved.com/
Competent, Friendly Bugzilla and Perl Services. Everything Else, too.