The current contributing docs for IGT state: << There is no formal review requirement and regular contributors with commit access can push patches right after submitting them to the mailing lists. But invasive changes, new helper libraries and contributions from newcomers should go through a proper review to ensure overall consistency in the codebase. >>
While not requiring reviews or acks has definitely increased the speed of development, I feel the time for slowing down a bit has come. At the very least I would like to see all commits have a visit to the mailing list before pushing, as the current docs already ask for. The "right after" part would be changed to a $period of quarantine, maybe 24 hours? As for requiring reviews or acks before pushing, how do the developers at large feel about that? Different rules for different parts of IGT? (Benchmarks, tools, tests, CI test sets, lib....) The goal with this discussion is to reach a suitable tradeoff between stability from CI point of view and fruitful use of programmer time. -- Petri Latvala _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
