On Tue, 19 Sep 2017 at 08:26 Eyal Edri <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sep 19, 2017 01:22, "Greg Sheremeta" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Roy Golan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 at 22:30 Yaniv Kaul <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Here[1]: >>> "Anyone can send a patch >>> >> > That's no longer true. We have a whitelist. [2][3] > > > Small correction, anyone can send a patch, only people from the whitelist > can trigger CI jobs on it, for reasons discussed before, mostly security > related. > > > >> Initially a patch should be sent as draft" >>> >> > I think we should edit that to be more along the lines of "consider > initially posting as a draft" with guidelines to assist the decision. > > >> A draft is hidden from the public, why is it better to send as such? >>> >> > I've sent draft patches for 2 reasons. > 1. I made progress on something and want to preserve it, but it's so WIP > that I wouldn't want anyone to see it. That might be because it could > confuse people, or it might be that the code is a prototype and/or so > terrible that I'd be embarrassed if anyone saw it :D Lately I'm more likely > to 'git format-patch | gdrive upload -' if it's something in this category. > 2. I don't want to waste CI resources on something. Sometimes related to 1. > > >> I see few advantages and they all drawn from the assumption the initial >> patchset is always some sort of work in progress in really most of the >> cases: >> 1. It doesn't invoke automation and waste resources. First the developer >> should run it and be passed the checkstyle/pep/other errors locally. >> 2. Default reviewers feature hopefully will put the reviewers in place >> automatically so it not hidden. >> > > Hmm, I believe the "hopefully" doesn't work. A few weeks ago I got a > notification that I had a draft to look at [because I was a default > reviewer], but when I followed the link, I received a "not found" error. > > By 'hopefully' I mean I hope people who care about certain areas stepped forward to be listed as default reviewers.
About the draft 'not found' - If you get that all the time I think this is a bug. Best wishes, > Greg > > [2] http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2017-February/029633.html > [3] https://ovirt-jira.atlassian.net/browse/OVIRT-1154 > > >> 3. After the patch is bit more mature it is worth publishing to get more >> reviews. Half baked or controversial patches may be costly to review. After >> they are published the reviewer can expect higher quality and can estimate >> better the effort in review >> >> IMHO we don't use this practice enough. >> >> TIA, >>> Y. >>> >>> [1] https://www.ovirt.org/develop/dev-process/working-with-gerrit/ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Devel mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > >
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
