openstack team mailing list archive

[Sandy Walsh <sandy.walsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yup, if you look at
http://www.darksecretsoftware.com/static/hubcap.html
you'll see there's a slot there for core & non-core approvals. We get the core approvers from the repos teams.

I like the idea of another keyword than !lgtm for cores to say "I approve, but don't consider this the +2" ... perhaps just "lgtm" (no !) heh

-S

PS> Notice the funky new stylings thanks to Jake Dahn!

________________________________
From: Josh Kearney [josh@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:05 PM
To: Soren Hansen
Cc: Sandy Walsh; openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Openstack] A possible alternative to Gerrit ...

On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 6:54 AM, Soren Hansen <soren@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:soren@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

The critical point has never been whether we could reliably detect
people's votes (even though I really dislike parsing free-form text to
extract critical information like this). Even though Launchpad offers
voting information in a structured manner, we *intentionally* don't
auto-approve things there as soon as they have +2.

Sometimes there are simply reasons why things shouldn't get merged
even though they have two approves. If there's already one +1, but
someone specific (someone with domain specific knowledge, a release
team member, etc) needs to sign off on it as well,  I still want to be
able to say that I've reviewed it and approve of it, without causing
it to get merged. We also want to be able to review features and vote
on them even during freeze times without causing them to get merged.

Couldn't we just add an extra keyword like '!approved' that Hubcap would only acknowledge from Core members? Unless that keyword is present, no matter how many '!lgtm's are there, Hubcap will not attempt a merge.

This email may include confidential information. If you received it in error, please delete it.