Flaw in our process for dealing with trivial changes
levitte at openssl.org
Fri Dec 13 11:08:42 UTC 2019
clacheck modification coming up!
On Fri, 13 Dec 2019 04:48:38 +0100,
Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> A better example of this problem: #10607. Both Paul and I approved it yesterday and I merged it
> today without noticing until too late that it was tagged “CLA: trivial” :(
> I’ve not reverted it at this point but will if necessary.
> Let’s get the label in.
> Dr Paul Dale | Distinguished Architect | Cryptographic Foundations
> Phone +61 7 3031 7217
> Oracle Australia
> On 13 Dec 2019, at 11:02 am, Richard Levitte <levitte at openssl.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:31:10 +0100,
> Dr Paul Dale wrote:
> A red blocker along the lines of: “Triviality Unconfirmed”. One of
> the reviewers needs to remove this before the PR can be merged.
> It’s in our face, it prevent accidental merges and its low overhead.
> I still think simply adding the label should be sufficient. I dunno
> about you, but I look at labels all the time, for all sorts of
> reasons, and one saying [cla: trivial] would certainly attract my
> Let's make it bright red-orange, that'll catch anyone's eye (even mine)
> Also, removing that label will rapidly be annoying as soon as someone
> closes and re-opens a PR... or whatever other action that triggers
> the "pull_request" event (and there's a lot that does that... our
> script is being kept busy!).
> Richard Levitte levitte at openssl.org
> OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
Richard Levitte levitte at openssl.org
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/
More information about the openssl-project