On Thu, 2019-01-17 at 08:38 +0100, Erik Faye-Lund wrote: > On Fri, 2019-01-11 at 10:57 -0600, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > All, > > > > The mesa project has now hit 100 merge requests (36 are still > > open). > > I (and I'm sure others) would be curious to hear people's initial > > thoughts on the process. What's working well? What's not > > working? > > Is it total fail and should we go back to mailing lists? > > > > So, overall I think it works pretty well. I have some things I think > maybe we could do better, some of which has already been pointed out: > > 1. New MRs should probably get their cover-letter automatically sent > to > the mailing list for incrased visibility.
OK, I think that after having enabled e-mail notifications and spent some time setting up mail filters, this is much less of a pressing issue for me personally. I'm not even sure I think this is worth the time any more, as the notification support in GitLab is *really* good, and allows nice and finely-grained control, much better than what an automatic mail-bot could do. This doesn't mean that I would opose it, though. Just that I think I would strike this from *my* personal list of things to improve. > 2. Perhaps we should ban sending MRs from the main mesa repo? With > gitlab, it's trivial to make your own fork, and you can delegate > permissions to other users for collaborators. I don't think there's > any > reason to clutter up the main mesa repo with all kinds of branches. > But > it seems some people send their MRs from the main-repo anyway. > Perhaps > we should document that this isn't how to send MRs? I've sent out a patch to add a note about this. > 3. There's some browsing-pain with the commit list. For instance, I > always second-guess if the latest commit is at the top or bottom. > Some > times this is not a problem due to timestamps, but sometimes this > isn't > clear from that either. I also tend to get a bit lost in context. > Some > of this is probably habit, though. > And I don't really think this is a big deal, especially after the discussion on this point below; GitHub is the oddball here, and that's not GitLab's fault. So all in all, I think all of my issues with the process has been resolved (assuming we land the patch with the MR-note in some form, and if we don't that's probably also for a good reason). So from my point of view, I would love to see us move to a MR-only workflow as soon as possible. Doing both is a little bit messy (as was anticipated). _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
