Re: needs-backport label on github/ceph/ceph

[kefu chai <tchaikov@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Nathan Cutler <ncutler@suse.cz> wrote:
> On 08/22/2017 05:12 PM, John Spray wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 4:09 PM, kefu chai <tchaikov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> i noticed that we have a new label named "needs-backport" [0]? could
>>> you shed some light on how we are supposed to use it? i thought we
>>> were going to cherry-pick all PRs with this label merged after the
>>> luminous was forked. but seems we are still marking PRs should be
>>> included by luminous with the "luminous" milestone. so i have no clues
>>> now =(
>>
>>
>> I'm curious too -- I believe the authoriative way to mark something
>> for backport is in a tracker ticket, so a separate label probably
>> isn't needed?
>
>
> Maybe it was added to accommodate/facilitate a "fast-track" backporting
> process for the early stages of the luminous release cycle?
>
> ISTR that jewel v10.2.1 went very quickly and some of the backports did not
> "cross all the t's and dot all the i's" wrt the sanctioned backporting
> process. Maybe something like that is a possibility for luminous as well? (I
> would welcome it.)
>
> It could work like this: if a PR is marked "needs-backport", the developer
> who merges the PR would be responsible for ensuring that the commits are
> cherry-picked to luminous and marking the tracker, if any, "Resolved" with a
> note that the backport is already done.

thank you, Nathan! that makes sense.

-- 
Regards
Kefu Chai