| 18 Aug 2025 |
 raitobezarius | i.e. a revert or X or Y where X or Y can be 'let's do nothing for now' :P | 15:33:26 |
| raitobezarius | I apologize for the communication and from now on, I will communicate for your stacks | 15:33:39 |
 emily | I think let's do nothing and I will try to come back to the rest of the stack soon. but if you could finish reviewing the CL you have +1 on that would help | 15:33:48 |
| emily | since I assumed the work was blocked on that | 15:33:53 |
| raitobezarius | (again: it was not urgently wanted but this was my Morning routine™ of merging things that are lingering) | 15:34:22 |
| emily | I expect to get back to building my system closure ~today-ish | 15:34:25 |
| raitobezarius | alright, thanks! | 15:34:45 |
| raitobezarius | will prioritize the last pieces | 15:34:51 |
| emily | (FWIW I think "committers always merge" or "authors always merge" is probably a better norm than it depending, for the usual Gerrit reasons of "it's obvious whose turn it is" + knowing expectations for how you should communicate if some work is pending on some testing to obtain full confidence or such) | 15:35:59 |
| emily | (though for stuff like urgent fixes or security stuff the latter can be a pain I guess) | 15:36:14 |
| emily | Nixpkgs has some problems with this too. (where two parties in a PR will deadlock waiting for the other to hit the button) | 15:36:33 |
| raitobezarius | (I'd also prefer that but the merge queue situation means that I have more people demanding why something is not merged than anything and teaching everyone about Gerrit's etiquette takes a lot of energy) | 15:36:39 |
