Re: pending-pullups

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Nov 29, 12:58pm, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
} > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 10:10:45AM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
} >  > dholland@ wrote:
} >  > 
} >  > > the state for "pullups are needed" is, alas, "open"
} >  > 
} >  > Where is it documented?
} >  > 
} >  > http://www.netbsd.org/support/send-pr.html says:
} >  > >> open
} >  > >>  The initial state of a Problem Report. This means the PR has been
} >  > >>  filed and the responsible person(s) notified. 
} >  >  :
} >  > >> pending-pullups
} >  > >>  The problem has been confirmed as being solved in -current and
} >  > >>  is waiting for pullups to the appropriate active branches.
} >  > >>  The PR remains in this state until the pullups are completed. 
} > 
} > That can be read either way, so possibly the answer is: nowhere.
} > 
} > sigh.
} > 
} > I will fix it, but not this weekend.
} > 
} > (the reason, besides "that's how it's been used since it was added",
} > is that the pending-pullups state distinguishes "PRs that somebody
} > needs to work on" from "PRs that are waiting on releng", which is an
} > important distinction when looking for work to do.)
} > 
} > we ought to have a pullups-needed state; maybe we should just add it
} > to gnats.
} 
} Why do you think two independent states are necessary? What's benefit?
} 
} "pending-pullups without ticket" implies that
} releng should check whether it should be really pulled up or not
} before starting actual release procedure.

     pending-pullups without ticket would be ignored by releng,
it's not their job to grovel through gnats.

} "pending-pullups with ticket" are handled by the own tracking system
}  http://releng.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/req-7.cgi
} and not by gnats, it seems.

     pending-pullups with a ticket can be thought of as a link to
the request ticket.  If releng sees the PR# in the pullup, then
they will often close the PR, but one shouldn't rely on releng to
manage PRs.

}-- End of excerpt from Izumi Tsutsui