On 01/07/2016 03:34 PM, David M Williams wrote:
It is already 'required' that contributors "go though Gerrit" ... but
it is allowed that the 'review/validation' can be skipped, if
"refs/heads/master" used instead of "refs/for/master".
Right, by enforcing Gerrit, I was meaning "enforcing review".
But I myself would not like to see it *required* to go through
"refs/for/master".
Why so? Have you tried using it?
I think most already do go through "refs/for/master" and the few times
they do not
It's about half-half:
http://git.eclipse.org/c/simrel/org.eclipse.simrel.build.git/log/ . All
changes that don't have a "refs/changes/..." tag where pushed directly
to master, without review and preliminary validation.
I would assume they have a good reason for it.
I would assume it's more that they need to be educated/encouraged/forced
to use Gerrit.
Can you point out (or monitor for) cases where people go directly to
"refs/heads/master" and it causes problems?
First, there are all failing builds that pre-dates Gerrit usage ;)
I have troubles to identify where to get a history of the SimRel builds
and to associate it with the actual commits that were involved. The CI
jobs on http://hudson.eclipse.org/simrel do not show easy to consume
data. Is there somewhere else I can look at to first get a list of
recent-ish failure of simrel for Neon?
--
Mickael Istria
Eclipse developer at JBoss, by Red Hat <http://www.jboss.org/tools>
My blog <http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com> - My Tweets
<http://twitter.com/mickaelistria>
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
[email protected]
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
