Hi,
Ague Mill wrote (14 Nov 2012 18:03:00 GMT) :
> The ticket was updated with the `todo/qa` tag in commit 9ce564b69a0
> on Oct 15th (nearly a month ago). It was labeled "Candidate for
> 0.15".
The commit message was: "Update status for persistent bookmarks".
Please take into account I am not reading every "status update" made
on the wiki to tickets about features I'm not working on, and we both
very well know that most Tails developers don't either. So I fail to
see why you think mentioning this change is relevant to the points,
needs and feelings I've raised.
> The same day, I had merged the branch in experimental and announced
> it on tails-dev, see:
> <https://mailman.boum.org/pipermail/tails-dev/2012-October/001884.html>
I think I now understand why you believe I should have seen/guessed it,
but I still see no explicit review and/or merge request in there.
Had I to read it again today, I would understand it the same way.
(
It looks like a part of the misunderstanding might come from the
fact you seem to rely on "merged into experimental => please
review".
It happens that we merge stuff into experimental before it is ready
for a formal review request, even if we think the code is fine, e.g.
because the documentation is not ready yet, or whatever other reason
*I*, not closely following this feature's dev process, am not given
to know. Hence the need for a *clear* review request. Else, I can
very well wait a few more weeks for this request to come.
https://tails.boum.org/contribute/git/#index6h3 reads:
experimental
Generally, it's devel plus a few topic branches merged in.
These topic branches are not ready enough to be merged into devel,
but we seriously would like to get them fit for the next stable
release, so this branch serves to test all these new features and
bugfixes by building / getting a single image.
That's basically how we've been using experimental since we have it.
Interestingly, now that we have the formal requirement to merge into
experimental when asking for review/merge, less stuff gets merged
into experimental before the formal review request.
)
> I am sorry that you missed it.
What happened is, apparently, a misunderstanding.
A misunderstanding is a shared problem.
I'm trying to express why I don't feel comfortable with the process
that happened, and I feel like you're throwing at me more or less
valid reasons why I'm just plain wrong, as if I was at fault not to
have understood what still looks unclear to me now.
Guess what: I'm *not* happy with that either.
Please do consider that it might be remotely possible that one did not
understand your actions and emails the way you think they should have.
["think positive" conclusion: "please review" in email subject helps.]
Cheers.
