That's essentially what I was getting at, but I think you put it better.
If I do that, then what is the best way to create a patch from the changes?

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 6:15 PM, Jason Lowe-Power <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Alec,
>
> What you're describing is *hard* and requires a lot of coordination between
> people. I think the best way to do it today is to use something out-of-band
> like a github mirror and then have one person rebase, etc. and submit to
> the mainline. That's basically what AMD and ARM do internally. It's harder
> to do with a geographically diverse set of people.
>
> If you need hosting and want to use gerrit for code review during
> development, we can set you up with a repository on gem5.googlesource.com.
> However, I think the path of least resistance is to set up a github repo.
> E.g., I have a github repo for my research group and that's what we used
> when I was at Wisconsin, too.
>
> Cheers,
> Jason
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:02 PM Alec Roelke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I'm not trying to suggest that there should be an "official" way to
> > collaborate on patches, since that's probably not a common enough
> > occurrence to warrant the effort of maintaining such a feature; I was
> > mostly wondering if there was a way to leverage what's already available
> to
> > do it.  Downloading and uploading revisions to others' patches is clunky
> > and, as Gabe mentioned, can lead to loss of work.  I was thinking more of
> > something like what Jason mentioned with creating a "riscv-fs" clone of
> > gem5 in GitHub or similar and creating patches out of commits to it
> > somehow.  Is that possible?
> >
> > I think overall what I'm trying to figure out is proper version control
> for
> > patches before they're uploaded to Gerrit so that two or more people can
> > work on one thing without worrying about losing work to conflicts.
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Gabe Black <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > In my past experience with gerrit, anybody can overwrite anybody else's
> > > patch. That may not be true for our instance here, but I suspect it is.
> > All
> > > you have to do is make sure the Change-Id: field is the same since
> that's
> > > how gerrit identifies changes. It's generally something to avoid since
> it
> > > can be inconvenient for the original author to download your new
> version
> > to
> > > replace their own locally, to make your edits locally, etc., to avoid
> > > blowing away your changes when they upload their own new version.
> > >
> > > I think the linux kernel uses both multiple git repositories and
> multiple
> > > git branches within those repositories to separate independent
> projects.
> > A
> > > big problem with that approach is that it takes concerted effort to
> keep
> > > all those different threads in sync and make sure they reconverge at
> all,
> > > and ideally frequently. They have vastly more developers and projects
> to
> > > coordinate than we do, and I don't think the overhead of that approach
> > > makes a lot of sense for us at this point and with our current capacity
> > for
> > > administrative overhead.
> > >
> > > If you want to push up your own independent version of somebody's CL
> for
> > > some reason, all you have to do is replace the Change-Id field (delete
> it
> > > and let git recreate it with a new value, for instance) and gerrit will
> > > treat it as a new patch even if everything else is the same. There are
> > > other ways to put changes up on gerrit which are work in progress sorts
> > of
> > > things. Those used to be draft changes, but I think they (the gerrit
> > > developers) reworked that into one or two similar but different
> > features. I
> > > think one is actually called a work in progress CL?
> > >
> > > Gabe
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Jason Lowe-Power <[email protected]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Alec,
> > > >
> > > > First, I'm not sure if collaborating on a single changeset is a
> common
> > > use
> > > > case for code review platforms. Though, I have run into a number of
> > times
> > > > where it would have been useful.
> > > >
> > > > Am I understanding your suggestion correctly? What you're envisioning
> > is
> > > > there would be a feature branch (say, riscv-fs) and many people could
> > > push
> > > > changesets onto that branch. Then, when the feature is working you
> > would
> > > > merge into master? Or, squash and go through code review? I'm not
> sure
> > > how
> > > > the final part would work.
> > > >
> > > > I'm open to this kind of workflow. We can create branches on gerrit.
> > > > Another option is what ARM and AMD are doing which is having their
> own
> > > repo
> > > > hosted on gem5.googlesource.com.
> > > >
> > > > What does the Linux kernel do in this case, I wonder. They have done
> a
> > > good
> > > > job working out procedures for massive open source development. They
> > are
> > > > usually a good inspiration.
> > > >
> > > > Second, as a maintainer, I believe you have enough access to just
> > > overwrite
> > > > someone else's commit. For instance, if you download a changeset,
> then
> > > > rebase, then push to refs/for/master it will update the review
> request.
> > > So,
> > > > as a maintainer, you can make a small change instead of asking the
> > > original
> > > > author. (I think this is right... I know *I* can modify patches and I
> > > think
> > > > it's the maintainer flag, not admin. If I'm wrong we can talk about
> > > > changing this permission.)
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Jason
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:02 PM Alec Roelke <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a way to allow multiple people to collaborate on a patch?
> > > Right
> > > > > now it looks to me like the only person who can make changes to a
> > patch
> > > > is
> > > > > the owner, which means that others' contributions have to be
> manually
> > > > > added.  Would it be possible for a person to create a personal
> branch
> > > of
> > > > > gem5 on GitHub or other git repository and then somehow push
> changes
> > > from
> > > > > there to Gerrit?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Alec Roelke
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > gem5-dev mailing list
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > gem5-dev mailing list
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > gem5-dev mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gem5-dev mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
> _______________________________________________
> gem5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
>
_______________________________________________
gem5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev

Reply via email to