On 08/22/2017 05:12 PM, John Spray wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 4:09 PM, kefu chai <tchaikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
i noticed that we have a new label named "needs-backport" [0]? could
you shed some light on how we are supposed to use it? i thought we
were going to cherry-pick all PRs with this label merged after the
luminous was forked. but seems we are still marking PRs should be
included by luminous with the "luminous" milestone. so i have no clues
now =(
I'm curious too -- I believe the authoriative way to mark something
for backport is in a tracker ticket, so a separate label probably
isn't needed?
Maybe it was added to accommodate/facilitate a "fast-track" backporting
process for the early stages of the luminous release cycle?
ISTR that jewel v10.2.1 went very quickly and some of the backports did
not "cross all the t's and dot all the i's" wrt the sanctioned
backporting process. Maybe something like that is a possibility for
luminous as well? (I would welcome it.)
It could work like this: if a PR is marked "needs-backport", the
developer who merges the PR would be responsible for ensuring that the
commits are cherry-picked to luminous and marking the tracker, if any,
"Resolved" with a note that the backport is already done.
Nathan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
