I am unfamiliar with how other big projects that use code review systems. Do they generally make (almost) everyone participate, or do they typically restrict review to a certain class of users?
-- NP-Hardass On July 4, 2015 4:14:14 AM EDT, "Manuel Rüger" <mr...@gentoo.org> wrote: >On 03.07.2015 22:22, Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> (Breaking the thread, because I believe this topic needs further >> discussion). >> >> On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 03:39:31PM +0200, Manuel Rüger wrote: >>> Are there still any plans to use a code review system like gerrit >that >>> will avoid merges, rebases etc. to the tree by just accepting and >>> serializing patches? >> Merges are a fact of life, they will be happening. >> This was included on: >> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_git_workflow >> >> Rebases of already published commits must be avoided. >> >> But beyond that, the general discussion was that a code review system >> was not in the immediate future... >> >> If the merge workflow becomes too problematic due to the high rate of >> change, then we can revisit those systems, to take advantage of their >> auto-merging functionality, but probably only in combination with the >QA >> testsuites. >> > >Using a Code Review System and allowing direct commits are not mutually >exclusive. >If infra has got time to set it up, this could be an option in addition >to direct commits for developers and we could make it obligatory (e.g. >for the first month) for new developers. > >It would also allow proxied maintainers to commit to the tree more >easily, as it will require just an additional ack by the proxy >maintainer. > >Manuel -- NP-Hardass
