Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Appearance settings

Cherry pick bpo-25008 to 3.4#280

Merged
warsaw merged 1 commit into
python:3.4python/cpython:3.4from
warsaw:bpo-25008-3.4warsaw/cpython:bpo-25008-3.4Copy head branch name to clipboard
Feb 24, 2017
Merged

Cherry pick bpo-25008 to 3.4#280
warsaw merged 1 commit into
python:3.4python/cpython:3.4from
warsaw:bpo-25008-3.4warsaw/cpython:bpo-25008-3.4Copy head branch name to clipboard

Conversation

@warsaw

@warsaw warsaw commented Feb 24, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

@warsaw warsaw merged commit f37b0cb into python:3.4 Feb 24, 2017
@warsaw warsaw deleted the bpo-25008-3.4 branch February 24, 2017 20:31
@ned-deily

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Why are we backporting this to 3.4? 3.4 is in security-fix mode so docs aren't updated or built. This doesn't seem to qualify as a security issue.

@dstufft

dstufft commented Feb 24, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We don't build docs for security-fix Pythons?

@ned-deily

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No, only those in maintenance mode. We don't accept doc fixes for security mode branches unless they have to do with a security fix.

@ned-deily

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@warsaw

warsaw commented Feb 24, 2017 via email

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@warsaw

warsaw commented Feb 24, 2017 via email

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@dstufft

dstufft commented Feb 24, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I thought it was odd that the branch wasn't even protected by CI checks. Looks like merges to 3.4 aren't prohibited by anything else either. Is it worth reverting? (It's not harmful.)

I think they are protected, you're required to be a member of the @python/python-release-managers team.. which you are :)

@ned-deily

ned-deily commented Feb 24, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I believe the branch is protected but you (@warsaw) are in the release manager group so you are able to push things there.

I take that back: they probably are rebuilt if any changes were pushed to the branch. But they're not supposed to be unless the release manager approves as a security fix.

@warsaw

warsaw commented Feb 24, 2017 via email

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@ned-deily

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Yeah, this particular change isn't a big deal but, on the other hand, there are likely other deprecations and doc updates that would be helpful to 3.4 doc readers but which haven't been backported per policy. I think we shouldn't make a habit of it :)
@larryhastings

@dstufft

dstufft commented Feb 24, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Maybe we can adopt python/core-workflow#32 to automatically add the relevant release manager as either the assigned person or request a review from them on branches that are security only. It'd require a bit of coding though.

jaraco pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2022
jaraco added a commit to jaraco/cpython that referenced this pull request Feb 17, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

Morty Proxy This is a proxified and sanitized view of the page, visit original site.