Re: [Qemu-devel] We need more reviewers/maintainers!!

[Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 12 March 2012 20:29, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
>> On 03/12/2012 03:24 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> I agree that that's a specific area it would be nice to do
>>> better in. It seems to me that the qemu-trivial process for
>>> sweeping up trivial patches has been working well; maybe we
>>> could use a slightly more formal qemu-urgent process for
>>> flagging up build breakage etc?
>>>
>>> (Personally I'd support a rule that any outstanding
>>> build-breakage fixes must always go in before anything else.)
>>
>>
>> When are build-breakage fixes not trivial?
>
> 'trivial' implies "it's OK if this patch doesn't go in for a
> week or two until the trivial patch queue has built up to
> a reasonable size". Also sending them via trivial means
> there's no mechanism for causing them to be applied before
> other commits/pullreqs. So generally I don't cc build-fixes to
> trivial.

Right, I specifically do not take build-breakage fixes because
trivial-patches pull requests don't happen immediately.

If there is a critical problem (i.e. a build breakage), then a
committer needs to take care of it so it can get merged directly.
Let's not make the path longer by going via trivial-patches here.

Stefan