Open Stack

On 05/16/2014 04:05 PM, Gauvain Pocentek wrote:
> Le 2014-05-15 18:08, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :
>> On 05/15/2014 11:48 AM, Tom Fifield wrote:
>>> On 15/05/14 11:40, Gauvain Pocentek wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I guess I should have asked this during this morning's doc session at
>>>> the summit, but I hadn't had real coffee yet (only decaf!).
>>>>
>>>> How do we handle backports reviews? Is one +2 enough (that's what
>>>> Andreas used to do during the post havana backport storm)? Is self
>>>> approval a valid option?
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to hear what you guys think.
>>>
>>> IMO: one sanity-check +2 from someone who is not the submitter
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> Also, backports should not be edited, if there are problems noticed, we
>> should do a patch for master to fix those and backport that one,
> 
> Sounds good to me. Thanks for the feedback!
> 
> I guess that we could add that info to the upcoming review guide :)

Sure, go ahead ;) But first let Anne approve the blueprint and get the
first patch in that creates it ;)

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg)
    GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126