<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Daniel Narvaez <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dwnarvaez@gmail.com" target="_blank">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>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.<br>
<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Usually is redundant, but there are cases where can add value, like when there are more than one author</div><div>or when the author sent a .diff instead of a .patch.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>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...<br>
<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>True. Modify every patch can be a pain, specially if we change the way we are working and move to use github web tools. </div><div>I am not sure what is the best to do here. Web interface makes a little more difficult to see this header info.</div>
<div>(Personally, I feel better in the command line yet)</div><div><br></div><div>Gonzalo</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">
<div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 3 April 2013 15:00, Gonzalo Odiard <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gonzalo@laptop.org" target="_blank">gonzalo@laptop.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I think we should keep using the Signed-off-by, Acked-by, Reviewed-by<div>signatures, because do not add too much work,</div>
<div>make clear the responsibilities, and recognize important work done </div><div>
as the review, needed by the project.</div><span><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>Gonzalo</div></font></span><div><div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Manuel Quiñones <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:manuq@laptop.org" target="_blank">manuq@laptop.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">As we are revisiting all the review process, can we revisit the usage<br>
of signing the patches? What are they useful for?<br>
<br>
2013/4/2 Daniel Narvaez <<a href="mailto:dwnarvaez@gmail.com" target="_blank">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
> So I'm not sure these are worth the overhead. Especially for signing it<br>
> doesn't seem to be very useful for us, if not in some special cases, and it<br>
> adds one more thing we need to require from contributors... I'd rather bug<br>
> them about improving the code then about using a tag of dubious utility.<br>
><br>
> Just my feeling really, I'm happy to keep using the tags if we think they<br>
> are necessary. Just trying to streamline things a bit if possible.<br>
<br>
Yes, I agree with you Daniel. I think we need the point of view of<br>
other devs, specially from those who are in the project prior than us.<br>
<br>
><br>
> On 2 April 2013 19:25, Manuel Quiñones <<a href="mailto:manuq@laptop.org" target="_blank">manuq@laptop.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi Daniel,<br>
>><br>
>> 2013/4/2 Daniel Narvaez <<a href="mailto:dwnarvaez@gmail.com" target="_blank">dwnarvaez@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
>> > Hey,<br>
>> ><br>
>> > sorry, I forgot about those. Though I think it's worth to think if we<br>
>> > really<br>
>> > need them while we are reworking reviews a bit.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > When is signed-off-by useful in sugar?<br>
>><br>
>> I think we just have been following other projects like the linux<br>
>> kernel. In many projects this means "I certify that my code is<br>
>> compatible with the license of this project". For me, it is useful<br>
>> only if the commiter is another user, to track the real author.<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Code_Review" target="_blank">http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Code_Review</a><br>
>><br>
>> > How is reviewed-by applied? Is it the reviewer which rebase and add them<br>
>> > before pushing?<br>
>><br>
>> Yes we have been amending the patches before pushing, all manual work.<br>
>> For me, the Acked-by signing has been useful to track who reviewed<br>
>> what. But maybe not a big deal?<br>
>><br>
>> So there are projects that do signing, and projects that don't. I<br>
>> searched quickly for a way to add Acked-by when github merges a pull<br>
>> request, but haven't found anything.<br>
>><br>
>> > On 2 April 2013 18:30, Manuel Quiñones <<a href="mailto:manuq@laptop.org" target="_blank">manuq@laptop.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Hi devs,<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> I've seen some movement in current master. I suppose all this was<br>
>> >> reviewed, but what I wonder is if we are sticking to the signed-off-by<br>
>> >> / acked-by signing.<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> The commits in question are:<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> commit f423ec21b4bf0d953a470a383cc801b61a087e98<br>
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <<a href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com" target="_blank">walter.bender@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> Date: Sat Mar 30 16:06:00 2013 -0400<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Add comment box to expanded entry<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> commit 541af0166030a5f3b7b52bdc23d416dbf688b5e9<br>
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <<a href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com" target="_blank">walter.bender@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> Date: Sat Mar 30 10:45:22 2013 -0400<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Add CommentView widget to expanded entry<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> commit 248a758875e5a02a53ae57980f4fe2f3bb0bb91e<br>
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <<a href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com" target="_blank">walter.bender@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> Date: Thu Mar 28 15:26:17 2013 -0400<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Make a separate method for _write_entry so method can be reused<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> commit 1af4b5ec7f03ed43da1616df946fe936e8577e91<br>
>> >> Author: Walter Bender <<a href="mailto:walter.bender@gmail.com" target="_blank">walter.bender@gmail.com</a>><br>
>> >> Date: Thu Mar 28 15:25:41 2013 -0400<br>
>> >><br>
>> >> Pass a widget to _create_scrollable so method can be reused<br>
>> >><br>
>> >><br>
>> >> --<br>
>> >> .. manuq ..<br>
>> >> _______________________________________________<br>
>> >> Sugar-devel mailing list<br>
>> >> <a href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
>> >> <a href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > --<br>
>> > Daniel Narvaez<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> .. manuq ..<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Daniel Narvaez<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
.. manuq ..<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Sugar-devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br></div></div><span><font color="#888888">-- <br>Daniel Narvaez<br>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>