[Sugar-devel] review process changes
tomeu at tomeuvizoso.net
Mon Jun 14 11:08:58 EDT 2010
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 14:17, Bernie Innocenti <bernie at codewiz.org> wrote:
> El Thu, 03-06-2010 a las 12:19 +0200, Tomeu Vizoso escribió:
>> Thanks, this is really useful. A few observations:
>> - how to link tickets and patches? One way is to always end the commit
>> message with a link to the bug: http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/1622
>> This is what git-bz does automatically. With proper email search, you
>> can get all tracmail and patch reviews with a single search.
>> - queue control: I still feel it will be harder to find the right
>> patch to review but at the same time, in all the other projects I
>> submit patches to, I need to ping people in irc to get them reviewed.
>> Should we move from a system with a strict queue to a ping-based
>> system? If so, we may need a "patch manager" as mentioned in
> I'm not a fan of patch managers, but Patchwork seems to be a very good
> one with a lightweight interface.
> Ping-based systems work well in practice because it puts the initiative
> on the side which submitted the patch and presumably cares the most
> about it.
> It works more like TCP than ping: if the maintainer forgot about your
> patch, you keep resending your patch until you obtain an ACK (or a NAK).
> Like in TCP, resending should be an exceptional case. If all patches
> routinely need to be resent multiple times, it means that we have
> insufficient reviewer bandwidth.
I'm ok with moving to a ping-based system. In my upstream work, I find
myself having to ping people all the time so my patches get reviewed,
even if bugzilla has quite good patch management and there are tools
for automating it such as git-bz and splinter.
> // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/
> \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/
More information about the Sugar-devel