Re: Motivational statistics

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 1:04 PM David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> Of course these are no scientifically hardened results - but they match
> >> the feeling of excited frenzy visible on this list. However sustainable
> >> the effect may be, the short term impact of the developer meeting and
> >> the conference seems to have been remarkable.
> >
> > I am also forming more coherent ideas about the development process,
> > but I am still unsure about the final push process. As I understand
> > it, you have to push to staging, and then someone (David?) runs patchy
> > over the staging branch, verifies the regtest output, and pushes to
> > master. Is that roughly correct?
>
> No.  staging moves without manual verification.  There are different
> Patchy processes for staging and for issue review.  The one for staging
> only checks that make, make test, and make doc all complete
> successfully.  Several people run that as needed (we used to have a
> computer administered by James running it regularly every two hours, but
> his company rules have stopped this from being possible).
>
> The review patchy in contrast requires visual inspection of regtest
> results.  The automation of the process deteriorated significantly after
> we had to stop using Google Code because the scripts have not been
> adapted to the current situation, and at the current point of time it is
> just James who does those tests with considerably more manual effort
> than previously.

I'm confused then. Can you sketch what happens after a patch was
LGTM'd on Rietveld? How does it get to staging, and how does master
advance?

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen