From: Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> Hi,
for years we have relied on unwritten traditions on how to review patches. Gaining commit access has been a secret rite no-one really knew what was required for to ask or grant it. I would dare claim that this has been partially the reason for why there are so few people who routinely review and land patches. At least I hope so, because "unwritten" is something we can fix. Let's try to write down the existing conventions and criteria we use to review patches. These will not be rules to be followed to the letter but to the spirit. Once we have documented guidelines for quality assurance on patch review, we can set up rules for granting commit rights. The movement to document commit rights requirements started in the kernel DRM commmunity as a tool to give out commits rights to more people and get more people involved and reviewing patches. I believe we would certainly want more people involved with Wayland and Weston, but it won't work if we don't also get more reviewers and committers. So here goes. Documenting what is expected from reviewers and commmit rights holders should make everyone's lives easier. These patches are my first take on it, and build on others' as referenced. I want to ensure that I am replaceable. That everyone is. The guidelines will not be perfect from the start. They should we honed over time. Thanks, pq Pekka Paalanen (2): contributing: add review guidelines contributing: commit rights CONTRIBUTING.md | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+) -- 2.16.4 _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
