On 7 September 2011 08:48, Thomas Jarosch <[email protected]> wrote: > Second this. Can gerrit be configured to request a review optionally? > Let's say one touches an unfamiliar area of the code (f.e. tagcache), > then it would be nice to request a review.
That's how I am intending to configure it. It's up to you at the time you push to the server (assuming you are a committer): if you push to refs/heads/master then it is submitted to the master branch immediately; if you push to refs/for/master then it creates a review. You can't submit a change that's been uploaded for review *though Gerrit* unless it has been reviewed, but you can still submit it directly by pushing it a second time to refs/heads/master (which closes the review automatically as it will notice it's been merged) if you change your mind about whether you needed a review :) Anyway. My view on this whole discussion is that I like the idea of requiring reviews in principle, but introducing this policy *now* would be crazy. We should make the tool available for people to use as they want, and see what happens. If people find that reviewing changes is a thing that actually happens reasonably often, and a significant number of committers choose to have a significant number of their changes reviewed voluntarily, then maybe we should discuss requiring reviews at that point, but right now we are already changing a number of aspects of our workflow because of the tool changes and it's already asking quite a lot of everybody to keep up with that. This is a pretty mature project with established ways of working, and changing too many things at a time without any chance to actually test things out is going to cause a lot of unhappiness. -- Torne Wuff [email protected]
