From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Abhishek Lekshmanan Subject: Re: needs-backport label on github/ceph/ceph Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 18:29:19 +0200 Message-ID: <87fuciqmcg.fsf@suse.com> References: <7f97669a-f05d-328b-a854-25f749742ccb@suse.cz> <87mv6qqt4h.fsf@suse.com> <9abaad60-9318-8362-209d-2b92c49c438f@suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: Received: from smtp.nue.novell.com ([195.135.221.5]:41291 "EHLO smtp.nue.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754131AbdHWQ3V (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2017 12:29:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <9abaad60-9318-8362-209d-2b92c49c438f@suse.cz> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Nathan Cutler , kefu chai Cc: John Spray , "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" Nathan Cutler writes: >> Can we ensure that we always have a tracker issue when there is a >> pending backport label, makes it easier to track these. > > I thought the whole idea was to make a "fast-track" backporting process > which would not require a tracker for each backport. With the > understanding that it would only be used early in the release cycle. If > a backport is "fast-tracked" the merging developer would be responsible > for doing and merging the cherry-picks. > > If there is a tracker, of course, then the normal workflow would apply > regardless of the presence/absence of this "needs-backport" tag. Sure makes sense, sorry, didn't see Sage's mail (until after I sent mine), yeah it does make sense for until the first backport release or so for using this tag. -- Abhishek Lekshmanan SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)