[core-workflow] Tracker workflow proposal

[R. David Murray]

On Thu, 24 Apr 2014 23:06:41 +0200, francis <francismb at email.de> wrote:
> >
> >> BTW. from a Non-Dev point of view:
> >>
> >> I just would like to be able to know how far or ready is a patch for
> >> manually review and then commit.
> >
> > Yes, that's part of the goal of my making the state of an issue
> > more fine grained.
> >
> IMHO it would also help to define what kind of work is "external" or
> "internal" (from the core-dev-commiter point view). Then that external
> steps should be, as far as possible, done (e.g. "ready for review",
> "ready for commit") before the core-dev looks at it (she/he should just
> do "internals": review, commit or reject :-)).

Yep, if you read it, that's what my stage structure is designed
to do.  There are only two gating points: will we fix this, and is
this committable.  Everything else non-committers can decide (though
core will no doubt chime in as we do now), and even the first of those
can be triage[*].

--David

[*] Or, as Antoine has advocated, anyone...though I worry that that will
leave people feeling like they did work for nothing if a veto on commit
comes from core later.