sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal
- From: Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal
- Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 20:31:00 -0700
>
> Yes, that would be helpful. Thanks a bunch. Can you limit it only to
> certain people who can add that tag? If not, We can just make it so
> that you have to comment that you changed the flag when you do change it
> so I don't have to go into bug activity and figure out who set it for
> every bug before integrating.
I added a "integrate to stable grimoire" flag. Its requestable so a
guru can set it to '?', and then someone else (presumably you, the GL,
or the PL) can set the flag to + or -. I dont know if theres a way to
delegate who can actually set the flags, I'll poke around some more and
see, but bugzilla lets you query on who set the flag and who requests it
so you can limit your search based on that. I'll poke around with the
settings and see if I can tune who can set it to what value. Its also
supposedly set to add you and grimoire at sourcemage to the cc list when
a flag is set.
>
> Also, I'd like to delegate the inter-stable integrates to stable to
> certain people who like to be really skeptical and have some free time
> on their hands (preferably people who are already developers, but if you
> pass some pretty strong background checks, I might turn a new developer
> away at it). I like to delegate, but I don't want them approving every
> request to stable just because. Good reasons needed.
Sounds good, we can control who gets access to stable via perforce but
require that the bug be flagged by an approved person first.
-Andrew
-
[SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Seth Alan Woolley, 05/02/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Andrew, 05/02/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Seth Alan Woolley, 05/02/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal, Andrew, 05/02/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Seth Alan Woolley, 05/02/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Seth Alan Woolley, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 05/03/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal, Seth Alan Woolley, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Seth Alan Woolley, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Seth Alan Woolley, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Eric Sandall, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/03/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal, Seth Alan Woolley, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Eric Sandall, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Arwed von Merkatz, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Seth Alan Woolley, 05/03/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] detailed QA stable grimoire and ISO proposal,
Andrew, 05/02/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.