On 2/20/14 12:02 PM, "Armando M." <email address hidden> wrote:
>Thomas,
>
>I feel your frustration, however before complaining please do follow
>the actual chain of events.
>
>Patch [1]: I asked a question which I never received an answer to.
>Patch [2]: I did put a -1, but I have nothing against this patch per
>se. This was only been recently abandoned and my -1 lied primarily to
>give patch [1] the opportunity to be resumed.
>
>No action on a negative review means automatic expiration, if you lose
>interest in something you care about whose fault is that?
>
>A.
>
>[1] = https://review.openstack.org/#/c/52757
>[2] = https://review.openstack.org/#/c/68611
>
>On 19 February 2014 06:28, Thomas Goirand <email address hidden> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've seen this one:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/68611/
>>
>> which is suppose to fix something for Postgress. This is funny, because
>> I was doing the exact same patch for fixing it for SQLite. Though this
>> was before the last summit in HK.
>>
>> Since then, I just gave up on having my Debian specific patch [1] being
>> upstreamed. No review, despite my insistence. Mark, on the HK summit,
>> told me that it was pending discussion about what would be the policy
>> for SQLite.
>>
>> Guys, this is disappointing. That's the 2nd time the same patch is being
>> blocked, with no explanations.
>>
>> Could 2 core reviewers have a *serious* look at this patch, and explain
>> why it's not ok for it to be approved? If nobody says why, then could
>> this be approved, so we can move on?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>>
>> [1]
>>
>>http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=openstack/neutron.git;a=blob;f=debian
>>/patches/fix-alembic-migration-with-sqlite3.patch;h=9108b45aaaf683e49b153
>>38bacd813e50e9f563d;hb=b44e96d9e1d750e35513d63877eb05f167a175d8
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> <email address hidden>
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>_______________________________________________
>OpenStack-dev mailing list
><email address hidden>
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Good Answer! :-)
On 2/20/14 12:02 PM, "Armando M." <email address hidden> wrote:
>Thomas, /review. openstack. org/#/c/ 52757 /review. openstack. org/#/c/ 68611 /review. openstack. org/#/c/ 68611/ anonscm. debian. org/gitweb/ ?p=openstack/ neutron. git;a=blob; f=debian fix-alembic- migration- with-sqlite3. patch;h= 9108b45aaaf683e 49b153 9f563d; hb=b44e96d9e1d7 50e35513d63877e b05f167a175d8 _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _____ lists.openstack .org/cgi- bin/mailman/ listinfo/ openstack- dev _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ ______ lists.openstack .org/cgi- bin/mailman/ listinfo/ openstack- dev
>
>I feel your frustration, however before complaining please do follow
>the actual chain of events.
>
>Patch [1]: I asked a question which I never received an answer to.
>Patch [2]: I did put a -1, but I have nothing against this patch per
>se. This was only been recently abandoned and my -1 lied primarily to
>give patch [1] the opportunity to be resumed.
>
>No action on a negative review means automatic expiration, if you lose
>interest in something you care about whose fault is that?
>
>A.
>
>[1] = https:/
>[2] = https:/
>
>On 19 February 2014 06:28, Thomas Goirand <email address hidden> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've seen this one:
>> https:/
>>
>> which is suppose to fix something for Postgress. This is funny, because
>> I was doing the exact same patch for fixing it for SQLite. Though this
>> was before the last summit in HK.
>>
>> Since then, I just gave up on having my Debian specific patch [1] being
>> upstreamed. No review, despite my insistence. Mark, on the HK summit,
>> told me that it was pending discussion about what would be the policy
>> for SQLite.
>>
>> Guys, this is disappointing. That's the 2nd time the same patch is being
>> blocked, with no explanations.
>>
>> Could 2 core reviewers have a *serious* look at this patch, and explain
>> why it's not ok for it to be approved? If nobody says why, then could
>> this be approved, so we can move on?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>>
>> [1]
>>
>>http://
>>/patches/
>>38bacd813e50e
>>
>> _______
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> <email address hidden>
>> http://
>
>______
>OpenStack-dev mailing list
><email address hidden>
>http://