On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:07 AM, <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:21:52AM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >> - Document the autoselect process >>Information about about What, Why, and [ideally] How - analogous to >>the normal stable nominations. >>Insert reference to the process in the patch notification email. > > I agree with this one, and it'll definitely happen. The story behind > this is that this is all based on Julia Lawall's work which is well > documented in a published paper here: > > https://soarsmu.github.io/papers/icse12-patch.pdf > > I have modified inputs and process, but it essentially is very similar > to what's described in that paper. > > While I have no problem with sharing what I have so far, this is > still very much work in progress, and things keep constantly changing > based on comments I receive from reviewers and Greg, so I want to > reach a more stable point before trying to explain things and change > my mind the day after :) > > If anyone is really interested in seeing the guts of this mess I > currently have I can push it to github, but bear in mind that in it's > current state it's very custom to the configuration I have, and is > a borderline unreadable mix of bash scripts and LUA. > > Ideally it'll all get cleaned up and pushed anyways once I feel > comfortable with the quality of the process. > >> - Make the autoselect nominations _more_ distinct than the normal stable ones. >>Maintainers will want to put more cognitive effort into the patches. > > So this came up before, and the participants of that thread agreed > that adding "AUTOSEL" in the patch prefix is sufficient. What else > would you suggest adding? The root of the concern seems to be around how the stable process currently works and how auto-selection plays into that. When Greg sends out the RC, the default model of "if nobody objects, this patch will get included in the next stable release" works because a human already identified as that needing to be included. So the review is looking for a NAK, but that's overriding another human's explicit decision with reasons. For something that is auto-selected, people seem concerned that the default should be flipped. Perhaps they'd be more comfortable if auto-selected packages required a human ACK before they are included? josh _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
