Align 6-week cycle check with beta promotion instead of stable release. #52940
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The regression check is to make beta promotion easier, so it makes more sense to use the Tuesday of the release week (T-2) as the end point of the regression prevention, instead of Thursday (T-0). But since the beta promotion PR is sent at Tuesday evening at UTC, the protection should include the whole Tuesday as well, meaning the 6-week cycle will start from Wednesdays. This will also move the start of the regression protection week one day earlier.
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors: r+ |
|
📌 Commit 0da7da8 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
|
📌 Commit 0da7da8 has been approved by |
cramertj
added a commit
to cramertj/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2018
…eek, r=alexcrichton Align 6-week cycle check with beta promotion instead of stable release. The regression check is to make beta promotion easier, so it makes more sense to use the Tuesday of the release week (T-2) as the end point of the regression prevention, instead of Thursday (T-0). But since the beta promotion PR is sent at Tuesday evening at UTC, the protection should include the whole Tuesday as well, meaning the 6-week cycle will start from Wednesdays. This will also move the start of the regression protection week one day earlier.
cramertj
added a commit
to cramertj/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2018
…eek, r=alexcrichton Align 6-week cycle check with beta promotion instead of stable release. The regression check is to make beta promotion easier, so it makes more sense to use the Tuesday of the release week (T-2) as the end point of the regression prevention, instead of Thursday (T-0). But since the beta promotion PR is sent at Tuesday evening at UTC, the protection should include the whole Tuesday as well, meaning the 6-week cycle will start from Wednesdays. This will also move the start of the regression protection week one day earlier.
|
@bors rollup |
cramertj
added a commit
to cramertj/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 3, 2018
…eek, r=alexcrichton Align 6-week cycle check with beta promotion instead of stable release. The regression check is to make beta promotion easier, so it makes more sense to use the Tuesday of the release week (T-2) as the end point of the regression prevention, instead of Thursday (T-0). But since the beta promotion PR is sent at Tuesday evening at UTC, the protection should include the whole Tuesday as well, meaning the 6-week cycle will start from Wednesdays. This will also move the start of the regression protection week one day earlier.
kennytm
added a commit
to kennytm/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 4, 2018
…eek, r=alexcrichton Align 6-week cycle check with beta promotion instead of stable release. The regression check is to make beta promotion easier, so it makes more sense to use the Tuesday of the release week (T-2) as the end point of the regression prevention, instead of Thursday (T-0). But since the beta promotion PR is sent at Tuesday evening at UTC, the protection should include the whole Tuesday as well, meaning the 6-week cycle will start from Wednesdays. This will also move the start of the regression protection week one day earlier.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 4, 2018
Rollup of 14 pull requests Successful merges: - #51919 (Provide `{to,from}_{ne,le,be}_bytes` functions on integers) - #52940 (Align 6-week cycle check with beta promotion instead of stable release.) - #52968 (App-lint-cability) - #52969 (rustbuild: fix local_rebuild) - #52995 (Remove unnecessary local in await! generator) - #52996 (RELEASES.md: fix the `hash_map::Entry::or_default` link) - #53001 (privacy: Fix an ICE in `path_is_private_type`) - #53003 (Stabilize --color and --error-format options in rustdoc) - #53022 (volatile operations docs: clarify that this does not help wrt. concurrency) - #53024 (Specify reentrancy gurantees of `Once::call_once`) - #53041 (Fix invalid code css rule) - #53047 (Make entire row of doc search results clickable) - #53050 (Make left column of rustdoc search results narrower) - #53062 (Remove redundant field names in structs)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The regression check is to make beta promotion easier, so it makes more
sense to use the Tuesday of the release week (T-2) as the end point of the
regression prevention, instead of Thursday (T-0). But since the beta
promotion PR is sent at Tuesday evening at UTC, the protection should
include the whole Tuesday as well, meaning the 6-week cycle will start from
Wednesdays.
This will also move the start of the regression protection week one day
earlier.