Hello, OK, I guess there might be some misunderstanding or at least partial information due to live meeting vs short announcement on list.
On Tuesday 09 September 2014 17:39:54 Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 16.59:35 Jan Kundrát wrote: > > On Tuesday, 9 September 2014 16:44:22 CEST, Eike Hein wrote: > > > Exclusively, or do they remain on ReviewBoard as well? > > > > My understanding is that they do remain on RB as well for now. The goal of > > this excercise is to get some understanding on how Gerrit works and > > whether it's a good match for frameworks; we aren't imposing some > > wide-ranging changes. > > Would it not make more sense to trial it using newer / smaller / unstable > projects, as it is an experiment? People at the meeting picked those two because it was deemed desirable to avoid using something small or not too active to find the pain points. I think it makes sense. For something which seldom get patches it's unlikely we'll have enough information for later decision. > As it stands with plasma-framework in particular, there is now a difference > in workflow depending on what *part* of plasma one is working on (framework > or workspace). So not only is it now different from the majority of > frameworks, it is also "different from itself". It was focused on KF5, but if Plasma people feel like having all the related repositories part of the experiment they could decide it but... > That this doesn't follow current documentation (such as it is) for new > developers certainly can't help any. ... the experiment is not about Gerrit vs Gitolite + ReviewBoard. It is Gerrit in addition to Gitolite + ReviewBoard. In that sense it is very different from the earlier GitLab experiment. Also it is completely opt-in for developers when they submit patches. I then doubt it would be a problem for new developers. The only thing they would "loose" by default is the knowledge of some of the patches cooking up in Gerrit when the team tests it. But I would be surprised if the majority of new developers actively look at the list of patches prepared in RB either. Regards. -- Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
