On 11 November 2014 11:33, Taras Kondratiuk <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On 11/11/2014 06:22 PM, Anders Roxell wrote:
>
>> On 11 November 2014 17:12, Taras Kondratiuk <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/11/2014 04:50 PM, Anders Roxell wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2014-11-11 08:24, Bill Fischofer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So what you're saying is that patches aren't always the practical
>>>>> solution?
>>>>>    :)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I like patches better... however, different taste =)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I spoke with Anders earlier and will get setup on people.linaro.org
>>>>> today.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> get a setup on git.linaro.org/people/<username>/...
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can we try as an experiment reviewing this series in Gerrit?
>>>
>>
>> and again, gerrit isn't good for discussions in patches =(
>>
>>
> Why not? It has its pros and cons if compared to ML review.


I also wanted gerrit when B&B in Linaro switched to it, here is what more
experience gerit users told me were the flaws.

   1. you may need a linaro account to send patches to ODP,  I assume this
   is true if we re use Linaro gerrit infrastructure
   2. The major concern was that apparently it is hard to have discussions
   via gerrit, I have never tried beyond using it for the q/a Testing repo in
   Linaro which are small straightforward patches.

I like gerrit because

   - current state of all patches is extremely clear - no grepping your mail
   - mandatory reviewers can be specified - you know who to target to get
   signoffs, on the other side you know you are expected to review something
   (maintainers, area experts get put on this list)
   - Objections to patches are clearly documented and not lost down a mail
   thread - no recycling issues

I personally believe that the discussion issue no.2 is resolved by the
patch submitter taking the initiative and calling, hangout, mailing the
folks with comments and then recording the result in gerrit rather than
bogging the list with the minutia - we could do that now too :)

Item one can be fixed no doubt, but for item two I am not sure it fixes our
fundamental problem, we need tight communication between submitters any key
reviewers before a patch even hits the list.

For 1.0 we should stick with what we have, we cannot afford a round of
assigning gerrit permissions to people and learning the too etcl right now.

Mike


>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lng-odp mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
>



-- 
*Mike Holmes*
Linaro  Sr Technical Manager
LNG - ODP
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp

Reply via email to