From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com (out01.mta.xmission.com [166.70.13.231]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.2340.1589048690219663761 for ; Sat, 09 May 2020 11:24:50 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@bsdio.com header.s=xmission header.b=TBaGTmUW; spf=pass (domain: bsdio.com, ip: 166.70.13.231, mailfrom: rebecca@bsdio.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=simple/simple; d=bsdio.com; s=xmission; h=Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=jPIiK2hkJHrqebphW8Gm7R9Oy3nP6DgKvOc/vhzWff8=; b=TBaGTmUWC3X29tAwV2rY1kfWwI SbR8GGMmIRoTw7CNlxi0MlIWUqrEgukaWQOD9hFnKAAcW8DlvtOv5vf0Ju8odnmxNdRNzRcpR8vbD QcLI+FjznvQ7TEc2Iy6nYEd4QAr2zQjOCoaKQ7wnZIf/c6h2ch++Kgsg1dQVwXsZwiT4=; Received: from in02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.52]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jXU9Y-0006FQ-DU; Sat, 09 May 2020 12:24:48 -0600 Received: from mta5.zcs.xmission.com ([166.70.13.69]) by in02.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1jXU9X-0001On-N9; Sat, 09 May 2020 12:24:48 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mta5.zcs.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C32412806F5; Sat, 9 May 2020 12:24:47 -0600 (MDT) X-Amavis-Modified: Mail body modified (using disclaimer) - mta5.zcs.xmission.com Received: from mta5.zcs.xmission.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta5.zcs.xmission.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Bb_sWDUKr3Gu; Sat, 9 May 2020 12:24:47 -0600 (MDT) Received: from [10.0.10.120] (muon.bluestop.org [65.103.231.193]) by mta5.zcs.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C96B128075C; Sat, 9 May 2020 12:24:47 -0600 (MDT) To: devel@edk2.groups.io, michael.d.kinney@intel.com, "rfc@edk2.groups.io" References: From: "Rebecca Cran" Message-ID: <8ff350e5-64ed-d338-af93-6d12f80004f5@bsdio.com> Date: Sat, 9 May 2020 12:24:46 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-XM-SPF: eid=1jXU9X-0001On-N9;;;mid=<8ff350e5-64ed-d338-af93-6d12f80004f5@bsdio.com>;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=166.70.13.69;;;frm=rebecca@bsdio.com;;;spf=pass X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 166.70.13.69 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: rebecca@bsdio.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on sa06.xmission.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.9 required=8.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_50, DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE,T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG,TooManyTo_001,TooManyTo_002, TooManyTo_003,XMSubLong autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5009] * 0.5 TooManyTo_002 Multiple "To" Header Recipients 3x (uncommon) * 0.3 TooManyTo_001 Multiple "To" Header Recipients 2x (uncommon) * 0.6 TooManyTo_003 Multiple "To" Header Recipients 4x (uncommon) * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa06 0; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] X-Spam-DCC: ; sa06 0; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: *;devel@edk2.groups.io, michael.d.kinney@intel.com, "rfc@edk2.groups.io" X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 489 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.04 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 11 (2.2%), b_tie_ro: 9 (1.9%), parse: 0.90 (0.2%), extract_message_metadata: 3.7 (0.7%), get_uri_detail_list: 0.45 (0.1%), tests_pri_-1000: 2.6 (0.5%), tests_pri_-950: 1.32 (0.3%), tests_pri_-900: 1.04 (0.2%), tests_pri_-90: 48 (9.9%), check_bayes: 47 (9.5%), b_tokenize: 4.8 (1.0%), b_tok_get_all: 4.7 (1.0%), b_comp_prob: 1.85 (0.4%), b_tok_touch_all: 33 (6.6%), b_finish: 0.84 (0.2%), tests_pri_0: 404 (82.6%), check_dkim_signature: 0.60 (0.1%), check_dkim_adsp: 137 (28.1%), poll_dns_idle: 129 (26.3%), tests_pri_10: 3.3 (0.7%), tests_pri_500: 11 (2.3%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-rfc] GitHub Pull Request based Code Review Process X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US On 5/8/20 8:59 PM, Michael D Kinney wrote: > * Perform final review of patches and commit message tags. If there are not > issues, set the `push` label to run final set of CI checks and auto merge > the pull request into master. What's the difference between the CI that runs when a user submits the Pull Request, and the final CI checks that run before the request is merged? Also, I'm wondering why Mergify is being used instead of the maintainer hitting the "Merge Pull Request" button, or however it's worded? -- Rebecca Cran