Earlier today I was attempting to fix bug 72498. I wanted to keep the bug open while I landed a workaround, so after the reviewer had R+'ed the change, I did a "webkit patch land --no-close" (landing as r100491). Unfortunately, the reviewer had CQ+'ed the change as well, landing the patch didn't clear that flag, so the commit queue landed it again as (r100509); coincidentally, this fix just happened to be something that could be safely applied multiple times. It would be nice if "webkit-patch land --no-close" still cleared the CQ+ flag, and I can't think of a reason where this would be bad. Any objections?
Great idea.
Sounds fine. We generally don't support the multiple-patches-per-bug workflow. That's somewhat intentional, but adding support in this way doesn't hurt so long as it's tested IMO.
I'm actually wondering if webkit-patch should just always clear the CQ+ flag, since presumably it is doing so in the non --no-close case?
It normally obsoletes the patches. But others complained in the past about webkit-patch clearing flags, so I think we compromised and didn't bother to obsolete patches when closing the bug. Eventually we dropped support for the multi-patch workflow as we never supported it well in the first place (and it's discourged for other reasons, including producing epic-bugs). I would rather add carrots to the master-bug approach than fixing the "re-use the bug for a second patch" approach. But again, I'm OK with this small fix if it will make your life better. :)
Given that this is the first time I've been bitten by this, it's clearly not a high pain point.