After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 720605 - commit-after_tweaks patch status
commit-after_tweaks patch status
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 684032
Product: bugzilla.gnome.org
Classification: Infrastructure
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Low enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: Bugzilla Maintainers
Bugzilla Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2013-12-17 15:14 UTC by Ray Strode [halfline]
Modified: 2015-01-04 14:46 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Ray Strode [halfline] 2013-12-17 15:14:59 UTC
often times a patch is substantially okay, but may need minor changes (say whitespace fixes or a better commit message).  When this happens the patch either gets the "Reviewed" status or the "accept-commit_now" status.  The latter means these patches get globbed into a pool along some patches that aren't really close to committable, and the latter puts them into a pool where they may get pushed accidentally without the tweaks.

What would be good is a status "commit-after_tweaks" that can be used for this purpose.
Comment 1 André Klapper 2015-01-03 14:44:16 UTC
IMHO "Reviewed" should die, as it means nothing (well, it means "I've seen this but I don't tell you what I think about it").

And "needs-work" already exists, and this sounds like a case for "needs-work" because it needs some more tweaks.

Or?

I don't want to differentiate to death by creating subsets of already existing statuses.
Comment 2 André Klapper 2015-01-03 14:52:45 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 684032 ***
Comment 3 Ray Strode [halfline] 2015-01-04 14:40:38 UTC
weird that i filed this twice.
Comment 4 Ray Strode [halfline] 2015-01-04 14:46:24 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> And "needs-work" already exists, and this sounds like a case for "needs-work"
> because it needs some more tweaks.

needs-work isn't really appropriate because needs-work implies another round of review is required.  It should be possible for a developer to query which patches are "ready to commit" and also for a developer to query which patches "are ready to commit after minor changes".  And the list of patches needing non-negligible fix ups shouldn't get mixed into the bunch since they aren't relevant near release day.

Anyway, i'm not going to argue too hard.  status quo has worked.