Hello,

i've added a merge request to the wiki https://wiki.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0_fixes_branch#Submitted_by_developer_.2F_committer_and_waiting_for_testing_.28do_not_commit_yet.29 . Is this a proper way to request merges?

Pascal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus-ide.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20190906/c2b04fde/attachment.html>

Pascal Riekenberg wrote

Hello, i've added a merge request to the wiki https://wiki.freepascal.org/Lazarus_2.0_fixes_branch#Submitted_by_developer_.2F_committer_and_waiting_for_testing_.28do_not_commit_yet.29 . Is this a proper way to request merges?

I would say it is a bit unusual. The bugtracker seems the correct way to me...

Michael.

You mean i should open a new issue for the merge request? The requested merge is linked to an issue http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=0035240 already.

Pascal

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus-ide.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20190906/a2136752/attachment.html>

Pascal Riekenberg wrote

You mean i should open a new issue for the merge request? The requested merge is linked to an issue http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=0035240 already.

Well, I think the lazarus team should answer this. I don't know how they work in such cases, but the wiki hardly seems a correct place to me for merge requests.

Michael.

Yes.

Mattias

Actually the "submitted by developer" section is meant to be used by team members (usually, but not always the committer of the revision) only. That means the responsible member has signed the patch off.

We used to have a "submitted by other" section.
But putting something in there, did still mean you needed to catch the developers (who committed) eye, and have him sign off on it. Otherwise it would sit there forever.

I moved them accordingly. But that means that you will need to ask the committer of that patch.

What about reopening the original issue and request a merge?

Pascal

Hi Juha,
can you have a quick look if this commit of yours can be merged to 2.0 branch?
r60719 IDE: Call DoCallBuildingFinishedHandler after ToolState is reset. Issue #0035240 <http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=0035240>

Pascal Riekenberg wrote

What about reopening the original issue and request a merge?

Probably fine too.

I would first put in here on the mail list. With a subject that catches the eye of the person responsible. That is often faster. I done that myself with fpc issues on the fpc list.

----------
I  had not actually looked at the issues. One was a fix to my report. I remember having tested the result myself. So I moved that to "confirmed".

The other issue still needs to be looked at. The issue was assigned to Juha, so lets ping him.

As a general note, it is a fixes branch. The issue reads like a feature / extension of existing abilities.
Then again that does not need to be 100% strict. I.e. being IDE core code (not affecting user apps) and having been in trunk for a while suggest a very low risk.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus-ide.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20190906/8d39edf6/attachment.html>

Yes, the "Call DoCallBuildingFinishedHandler after ToolState is reset" issue was reopened and marked for merging.
It is a bug fix because the handler was clearly called in a wrong place.

Sorry for a 2 weeks delay in my reply. I didn't read this list for a while. I hope I will have more time for Lazarus issues during the coming winter.

Regards,
Juha

Juha Manninen wrote

I hope I will have more time for Lazarus issues during the coming winter.

That relates to the winter in the northern hemisphere, or the (more distant) winter in the southern hemisphere?

SCNR... ;)