Re: somebody needs to run staging before 29 Jan

[Graham Percival]

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 04:39:31PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> "Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > My other current concern is to wonder whether lots of people trying to
> > get patchy running might not collide with each other.

I don't think so; once the first set of commits were pushed to
master, I would expect that other people will just get a
"non-fast-forwarding" reply when Patchy attempts to push to
master.

> > As I understand
> > it, the key patchy function is to pull patches from staging,
> 
> The current state of staging.  It does not test individually.

> > run make and make test, and check the regtest output.

No regtest examination.  It builds make, make test, and make doc,
and if nothing fails -- using the make(1) definition of fails --
then it merges and pushes to master.

> >  If this is OK
> > it sends a message saying "LGTM".  Is this correct?
> 
> Nope, it bounces master to staging (or recommends doing it, depending on
> what Graham did).

It bounces master to staging directly.  It sends a personal mail
saying it's done; if it fails, it sends a personal mail CC'd to
-devel.  But the mail can be dispensed with for the first few
tests.

> > Does it actually do any of the merging of patches from staging into
> > master?  I wouldn't want to do that without knowing I was doing
> > it... (although my new user would presumably fail anyway, since I've
> > not yet set it up for push access).

Yes, but the whole point is that you don't need to know what
you're doing.  The script handles it (as long as your new user has
git push access).

- Graham