[Sugar-devel] Usage of Signed-off-by / Acked-by - Re: Recent movement on Sugar master repository

[Daniel Narvaez]

Perhaps you can explain exactly what Signed-off-by adds compared to the
author field in tnormal cases? I know it's not much work, but it adds one
more thing we need to request to patch submitters. I tend to think the
simpler is the process the more patches we will get :) Or at least I
personally get really annoyed by bureaucracy when submitting code.

About Reviewed-by, if you have say a 10 patches set, is one-by-one
interactive rebase the only way to add the tag to all the patches? I'm not
too attached to the one click pull request merging from the web UI...
pulling and pushing on the command line is not too complicated. Though if
you have to modify patches one by one it starts to get annoying...



On 3 April 2013 15:00, Gonzalo Odiard <gonzalo at laptop.org> wrote:

> I think we should keep using the Signed-off-by, Acked-by, Reviewed-by
> signatures, because do not add too much work,
> make clear the responsibilities, and recognize important work done
> as the review, needed by the project.
>
> Gonzalo
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>
>> As we are revisiting all the review process, can we revisit the usage
>> of signing the patches?  What are they useful for?
>>
>> 2013/4/2 Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>:
>> > So I'm not sure these are worth the overhead. Especially for  signing it
>> > doesn't seem to be very useful for us, if not in some special cases,
>> and it
>> > adds one more thing we need to require from contributors... I'd rather
>> bug
>> > them about improving the code then about using a tag of dubious utility.
>> >
>> > Just my feeling really, I'm happy to keep using the tags if we think
>> they
>> > are necessary. Just trying to streamline things a bit if possible.
>>
>> Yes, I agree with you Daniel.  I think we need the point of view of
>> other devs, specially from those who are in the project prior than us.
>>
>> >
>> > On 2 April 2013 19:25, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Daniel,
>> >>
>> >> 2013/4/2 Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>:
>> >> > Hey,
>> >> >
>> >> > sorry, I forgot about those. Though I think it's worth to think if we
>> >> > really
>> >> > need them while we are reworking reviews a bit.
>> >> >
>> >> > When is signed-off-by useful in sugar?
>> >>
>> >> I think we just have been following other projects like the linux
>> >> kernel.  In many projects this means "I certify that my code is
>> >> compatible with the license of this project".  For me, it is useful
>> >> only if the commiter is another user, to track the real author.
>> >>
>> >> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Code_Review
>> >>
>> >> > How is reviewed-by applied? Is it the reviewer which rebase and add
>> them
>> >> > before pushing?
>> >>
>> >> Yes we have been amending the patches before pushing, all manual work.
>> >>  For me, the Acked-by signing has been useful to track who reviewed
>> >> what.  But maybe not a big deal?
>> >>
>> >> So there are projects that do signing, and projects that don't.  I
>> >> searched quickly for a way to add Acked-by when github merges a pull
>> >> request, but haven't found anything.
>> >>
>> >> > On 2 April 2013 18:30, Manuel Quiñones <manuq at laptop.org> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi devs,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I've seen some movement in current master.  I suppose all this was
>> >> >> reviewed, but what I wonder is if we are sticking to the
>> signed-off-by
>> >> >> / acked-by signing.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The commits in question are:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> commit f423ec21b4bf0d953a470a383cc801b61a087e98
>> >> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> >> Date:   Sat Mar 30 16:06:00 2013 -0400
>> >> >>
>> >> >>     Add comment box to expanded entry
>> >> >>
>> >> >> commit 541af0166030a5f3b7b52bdc23d416dbf688b5e9
>> >> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> >> Date:   Sat Mar 30 10:45:22 2013 -0400
>> >> >>
>> >> >>     Add CommentView widget to expanded entry
>> >> >>
>> >> >> commit 248a758875e5a02a53ae57980f4fe2f3bb0bb91e
>> >> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> >> Date:   Thu Mar 28 15:26:17 2013 -0400
>> >> >>
>> >> >>     Make a separate method for _write_entry so method can be reused
>> >> >>
>> >> >> commit 1af4b5ec7f03ed43da1616df946fe936e8577e91
>> >> >> Author: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>> >> >> Date:   Thu Mar 28 15:25:41 2013 -0400
>> >> >>
>> >> >>     Pass a widget to _create_scrollable so method can be reused
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> .. manuq ..
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> >> >> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> >> >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Daniel Narvaez
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> .. manuq ..
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Daniel Narvaez
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> .. manuq ..
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Narvaez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20130403/bd57b022/attachment.html>