--xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 03:11:55PM +0900, Yuki Sonoda (Yugui) wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> =3D=3D Background
> I have been maintaining ruby_1_9_1 and ruby_1_9_2 branch.
> Ruby 1.9 is now stable as Ruby 1.8 was, but it has not yet reached to
> the bugless nirvana. So Ruby 1.9 needs continuous maintenance.
>=20
> But actually ruby_1_9_1 is no longer well-maintained. My backports to
> ruby_1_9_? tend to be late. There is a bottle-neck.
>=20
> The bottle-neck is review process for commits in trunk.
> A few bug is branch-specific. Most of bugs in Ruby 1.9.x reproduce
> with trunk too. So I rarely need to write a branch specific patch.
> Just backporting from trunk fixes most of bugs in Ruby 1.9.x.
> But I need to read a commit carefully and run unit tests before
> backport the commit. This review process takes really really long.
> That's why patch level releases have been late.
>=20
> =3D=3D Proposal
> Let's parallelize the bottle-neck.
> Review and tests are necessary for stability and compatibility of
> released branches but these processes can be parallelized.
> I propose the following process:
>=20
> * A committer who fixed a bug in trunk should also check if the bug
>   reproduces with other active branches. If reproduces, (s)he should
>   create a backport request on the Redmine.
>   * Or anyone who want us to backport a commit in trunk can create a
>     backport request.
> * Another committer review the request. This reviewer checks if this
>   commit is good enough and backport it to the older branch.
> * Any committer who thinks the backport breaks compatiblity can revert
>   it.
>   * Eventually the maintainer of the branch decides to revert or not.

I would like to try the new system.  :-)

I've submitted a backport request here:

  http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5646

Can someone +1, and I'll merge to the bugfix branch?  Thank you!

--=20
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/

--xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOxUYQAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/G+2IH/jiuPItsnhvNBOfphcSWs5Pl
sO+bVQdUjD9eaoyogV11GSYHb3TED1Fd7U669AJfTLWZF0JUSzX0z69mDo2eAR5I
6nivapqg1ZO2lPLfqRLshjkw7drLvQfoDFOZ0Zny72rhr9CCzkhQmz3kb8dkrwTy
ElswopqYrj+Q0240IpEJX3ZBdJl0H4rxwTD68IpbAt3tEJ08UF14R+qxk3d3Xa9u
W2TfOdbwpM4/Lbb/UwJhr5SPkqWzZ7EFzkPaJYYQJAu7QuckaDwgi46QsltjHwIU
yr9sJjIQ/KuW3+D5arrTPEUftTP64ndNsRUY0T+uTSPjm8/vjn9894AEqynPwOk=
=+2h4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y--

On Sat, Nov 05, 2011 at 03:11:55PM +0900, Yuki Sonoda (Yugui) wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> =3D=3D Background
> I have been maintaining ruby_1_9_1 and ruby_1_9_2 branch.
> Ruby 1.9 is now stable as Ruby 1.8 was, but it has not yet reached to
> the bugless nirvana. So Ruby 1.9 needs continuous maintenance.
>=20
> But actually ruby_1_9_1 is no longer well-maintained. My backports to
> ruby_1_9_? tend to be late. There is a bottle-neck.
>=20
> The bottle-neck is review process for commits in trunk.
> A few bug is branch-specific. Most of bugs in Ruby 1.9.x reproduce
> with trunk too. So I rarely need to write a branch specific patch.
> Just backporting from trunk fixes most of bugs in Ruby 1.9.x.
> But I need to read a commit carefully and run unit tests before
> backport the commit. This review process takes really really long.
> That's why patch level releases have been late.
>=20
> =3D=3D Proposal
> Let's parallelize the bottle-neck.
> Review and tests are necessary for stability and compatibility of
> released branches but these processes can be parallelized.
> I propose the following process:
>=20
> * A committer who fixed a bug in trunk should also check if the bug
>   reproduces with other active branches. If reproduces, (s)he should
>   create a backport request on the Redmine.
>   * Or anyone who want us to backport a commit in trunk can create a
>     backport request.
> * Another committer review the request. This reviewer checks if this
>   commit is good enough and backport it to the older branch.
> * Any committer who thinks the backport breaks compatiblity can revert
>   it.
>   * Eventually the maintainer of the branch decides to revert or not.

I would like to try the new system.  :-)

I've submitted a backport request here:

  http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5646

Can someone +1, and I'll merge to the bugfix branch?  Thank you!

--=20
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOxUYQAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/G+2IH/jiuPItsnhvNBOfphcSWs5Pl
sO+bVQdUjD9eaoyogV11GSYHb3TED1Fd7U669AJfTLWZF0JUSzX0z69mDo2eAR5I
6nivapqg1ZO2lPLfqRLshjkw7drLvQfoDFOZ0Zny72rhr9CCzkhQmz3kb8dkrwTy
ElswopqYrj+Q0240IpEJX3ZBdJl0H4rxwTD68IpbAt3tEJ08UF14R+qxk3d3Xa9u
W2TfOdbwpM4/Lbb/UwJhr5SPkqWzZ7EFzkPaJYYQJAu7QuckaDwgi46QsltjHwIU
yr9sJjIQ/KuW3+D5arrTPEUftTP64ndNsRUY0T+uTSPjm8/vjn9894AEqynPwOk=
=+2h4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----