Re: [Tails-dev] Automated builds specification

On 06/16/2015 02:41 PM, bertagaz wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 01:59:06PM +0200, intrigeri wrote:
>> anonym wrote (30 Mar 2015 07:48:28 GMT) :
>>> On 29/03/15 15:04, bertagaz wrote:

>>> Wild (possibly unrelated) idea: instead of only notifying the author of
>>> the last commit of a topic branch, what about notifying all authors of
>>> the topic branch since it deviated from the base branch?
[...]
>>> Also, I guess we need to filter out authors that are not Tails "core"
>>> developers, so they do not get build failure notifications. This applies
>>> to both packages uploaded (when we upload a package built by a 3rd
>>> party), and Git (patches). Hmm.
>>sure.
>> Why?
>
> I think on the contrary it might be useful for people that are not core
> devs to get notifications on build failure.

I'm not sure that contributors will appreciate these notifications.

Any way, at least some "core" member *must* be notified too since they
have the power to actually fix it so...

>>> This makes me think that we should perhaps look at Git committer
>>> name/email in Git instead of the author.
>>
>> Indeed, Git has separate committer and author "metadata fields" for
>> each commit. But I don't understand what exactly you're suggesting we
>> use them for -- may you please elaborate on this idea?
>
> I don't think it's that important. The only use case I see where it would
> change who gets the notification would be when one of us import a patch
> we received. Then, it is interesting still to use the author field, as it
> means that the notification would be sent to the one who actually wrote
> the patch, and not just to the one who merged it. Or maybe we want both of
> them to be notified?

... notifying both author and committer seems like a very nice idea.

Cheers!