Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/gnu
To: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <email@example.com>
From: James Chacon <jmc@NetBSD.org>
Date: 04/19/2004 12:26:26
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 02:10:28AM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 04:49:03PM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> > > > Has a pullup to 1.6 and 2.0 branches been requested?
> > >
> > > yup.
> > Ummm.No it hasn't
> > Email along the lines of "someone should pull this stuff up" != pullup request.
> i was unsure about policy regarding this kind of jumbo pullup, so
> i sent the previous email. i guess i can send pullup request as you
> wish (jumbo upgrade, or small patch).
> i know releng is a tough task to handle, but it seems that releng is
> too strict about handling incoming requests.
We process (during a branch cycle) easily 30-50 requests/week. At that rate
the onus does get put on developers to follow the process to some degree.
Exceptions are made all the time for things not exactly there but close, but
expecting releng to do the legwork to pull a request together doesn't exactly
In this specific case, no details were sent to us at all except
"I've imported the new cvs, you should pull it up". i.e. no revision
information, no log information, no source-changes mails, no diffs, etc.
A patch works, or a list of revisions to pullup (via the source-changes mail).
This isn't asking much as pullup requests are expected to be tested before
they're sent so this is information you should already have in hand.