Hi all,

I propose that we add a new meeting to 
https://www.yoctoproject.org/public-virtual-meetings/, similar to the Bug 
Triage meeting but to review incoming patches. The patch queue is long and 
whilst we talk about how patches-on-list means anyone can perform drive-by 
review, there’s no way to know if someone has actually reviewed a patch and 
mentally said “this looks good”, or if several people have seen a patch and 
been sceptical but not actually posted their thoughts. This proposal aims to 
counter that problem.

We have a patchwork instance at patchwork.yoctoproject.org which has the 
ability to track patches, their state, and assign them to a specific person. 
This is the bare minimum of a patch triage process, we just need to use it.  I 
admit that what I’m proposing here is inspired by the glibc project process 
(sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PatchworkReviewMeetings), because I learnt about 
their process whilst attending the GNU Cauldron conference.

As we have a fairly constant stream of patches, I expect these triage meetings 
should be done twice weekly, to allow for rapid feedback and review cycles. 
Each meeting would be an hour long: the first half spent quickly reviewing as 
much of the patch queue as possible with any discussion postponed until the 
second half. This means the attendees can hopefully work through a large number 
of patches quickly before circling back on the more interesting patches.  Any 
patches which result in a bigger discussion or have open questions should 
likely be discusseed in the Engineering Sync, where the attendence will be 
larger.  As patchwork is primarily a read-only system (apart from status and 
delegation), a wiki page will be needed to keep minutes and notes.
I propose the process to be as follows:

1. Obtain last patch ID reviewed from the meeting minutes

2. Iterate through the patches since the last patch reviewed, oldest first, and 
review. Quickly review as a group and assign a delegate and provisional status:
– Looks Good: move to Under Review status. Will be incorporated into a staging 
branch by the delegate so that if it fails testing the status can be changed.
– Looks Bad: move to Rejected status. Note the feedback in the minutes, the 
delegate is responsible for responding on the list with this feedback.
– Needs Work (quick): move to Action Required. Note the feedback in the 
minutes, the delegate is responsible for responding on the list with this 
feedback.
– Needs Further Review. Move to Action Required. Note this choice in the 
minutes, and either discuss later in the call or in the Engineering Sync. It is 
the responsiblity of the delegate to have this discussion.

3. Discuss any patches marked a Needs Further Review, and any other patches 
that the group wish to discuss.

4. Review the state of all patches that have been delegated but not yet 
resolved.

5. Note down in the minutes the last patch ID reviewed, for the next meeting.

As a straw-man proposal, I suggest Monday and Thursday for the calls. The hour 
slot immedatiately after bug triage?

Looking forward to your thoughts,
Ross
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#1789): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/1789
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/101862943/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to