[Mesa-dev] [RFC] Mesa 17.3.x release problems and process improvements

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 6:00 PM, Dylan Baker <dylan at pnwbakers.com> wrote:
> Quoting Ilia Mirkin (2018-03-21 17:39:14)
>> Just one bit of feedback, for the rest I either agree or have no opinion:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 8:28 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >  * unfit and late nominations:
>> >     * any rejections that are unfit based on the existing criteria can
>> >       be merged as long as:
>> >        * subsystem specific patches are approved by the team
>> >          maintainer(s).
>> >        * patches that cover multiple subsystems are approved by 50%+1
>> >          of the maintainers of the affected subsystems.
>>
>> I don't think 50% + 1 is workable. That would mean for a core mesa
>> patch, one would have to get like 5+ people to ack it. Seems like a
>> lot. (And I suspect will lead to debates about how to count "affected"
>> subsystems.) IMHO 2 is enough, i.e. the maintainer that wants it, and
>> another maintainer who thinks it's reasonable.
>
> What do we do if two maintainers say yes, but it breaks another driver? I'm
> asking because we've had these sort of problems in the past.

An explicit NAK from any maintainer kills the whole thing. I believe
this should apply to all patches, not just these "unfit and late
nominations" category. At least that's what makes sense to me. Ideally
the two warring factions will come to some agreement, but it's not the
release manager's responsibility to resolve these conflicts.

  -ilia