Does this mean that an unfortunately-timed patch may make it to m-c only to find that a push-job breaks later? Or do we have some way of letting the interval jobs catch up before selecting merge candidates?
Bug 1621764 Comment 16 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
Does this mean that an unfortunately-timed patch may make it to m-c only to find that a push-interval job breaks later? Or do we have some way of letting the interval jobs catch up before selecting merge candidates?