Skip to content

Audit commits not found on v4.x-staging #7116

Description

@MylesBorins
branch-diff v4.x-staging master --exclude-label semver-major,semver-minor,lts-watch-v4.x,dont-land-on-v4.x --filter-release
  • [4fe1d6e75f] - unix,stream: fix getting the correct fd for a handle (Saúl Ibarra Corretgé) #6753

Activity

  1. MylesBorins commented on Jun 2, 2016

    @MylesBorins
    ContributorAuthor

    This list is about 1/3 of what there was yesterday when I started auditing... @nodejs/collaborators we need to be doing a better job with our LTS labelling

  2. added
    metaIssues and PRs related to the general management of the project.
    on Jun 2, 2016
  3. Trott commented on Jun 2, 2016

    @Trott
    Member

    @thealphanerd We don't explain LTS labeling very much in our onboarding and I would not be surprised if most collaborators know little or nothing about it. There's a brief note in https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/doc/onboarding-extras.md#labels. Perhaps you (or James or someone else who understands it better than most) can expand on that note and/or put a clear procedure in the main doc at https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/doc/onboarding.md. Something clear and algorithmic would be awesome. If it requires squishy judgments and there's no way around it, then just noting that and moving on is probably fine.

    Maybe put a rough draft in a comment on this issue? As clearly as you can state, what do you want collaborators to do in response to this issue and in the future? For example:

    [f85412d] - doc: improvements to child_process, process docs (Alexander Makarenko)

    What, if anything, should Alexander do about that at this time? And if it's not the same thing as what should be done in the first place, then what should he do differently in the future?

    I definitely do not give any significant time to LTS labeling in the onboarding sessions I've done, so my apologies about that, and let's fix it.

  4. MylesBorins commented on Jun 2, 2016

    @MylesBorins
    ContributorAuthor

    @Trott I'll work on better docs. TLDR;

    • If you think something should be considered for LTS include lts-watch
    • If you think something is definitely not LTS include dont-land
    • If you are unsure ping @nodejs/lts or just leave it to be audited later

    The above applies to everyone dealing with an incoming PR at any point in the review cycle

    As for f85412d it looks like it is popping up as a false positive due to the lake of PR-URL. I am considering trying to introduce another fallback mechanism into our release tooling to allow us to add meta data that can be followed to the commits comment log.

  5. MylesBorins commented on Jun 3, 2016

    @MylesBorins
    ContributorAuthor

    Ok we are all done!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    metaIssues and PRs related to the general management of the project.

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions