Noosfero 1.1 delayed, and thoughts for the 1.2 cycle

[Antonio Terceiro]

On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 03:40:05PM -0300, Bráulio Bhavamitra wrote:
> Hello terceiro,
> 
> From my experience and own mistakes, I would add another point: we should
> stop (or almost always avoid) commits for "non-trivial" stuff, and instead
> make MRs,

This should already be the case, because (quoting the development policy in
DEVELOPMENT.md):

  * Every new feature or non-trivial bugfix should be reviewed by at least one
    committer. This must be the case even if the original author is a committer.
  [...]
  * Committers should feel free to push trivial (or urgent) changes directly.
    There are no strict rule on what makes a change trivial or urgent; committers
    are expected to exercise good judgement on a case by case basis.

Only trivial changes or urgent fixes are allowed to be pushed without review.

Maybe people are not capable of exercising good judgement on what is
trivial/urgent and what isn't, and we need a strict definition.

>  even on the feature freeze period.

*Specially* during the freeze.

> I really agree to have a CI run for each merge request before merge. The
> only thing bad is that a runner must be setup for each fork, that is, we
> cannot have one runner to run all MRs. I think that is a design problem in
> Gitlab CI and we should report that to them.

This really sucks.

-- 
Antonio Terceiro <terceiro at colivre.coop.br>
Colivre - Cooperativa de Tecnologias Livres
http://www.colivre.coop.br/


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://listas.softwarelivre.org/pipermail/noosfero-dev/attachments/20150402/f15ce7c3/attachment.pgp>