[agl-discussions] [RFC] Development / Gerrit Workflow tuning
jose.bollo at iot.bzh
Thu Feb 8 09:28:22 UTC 2018
On Wed, 07 Feb 2018 16:07:57 +0100
Jan-Simon Möller <jsmoeller at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi all !
> As a follow-up of today's SAT call we'd like to gather your feedback
> about the current gerrit workflow and how we can improve it.
> Please reply with your thoughts:
> - what is working good and should be kept as-is ?
The review process is cool.
> - what is slowing us down ?
CSS of gerrit not compliant with firefox (or conversely)
I have to admit that sometime I am too lazy to review anything.
Probably that enforcing me could help.
> - what else would you change ?
> For the next development cycle, we'd like to gather your feedback on
> the proposed adaptations for the gerrit process:
> - We want to increase the number of maintainers with merge access to
> avoid bottlenecks and speed-up the flow of code.
Agreed, JSM is not enough.
> - Each profile (IVI, telematics, core) would have a set of
> maintainers (>=3)
> - src / staging would have a set of maintainers (>=5)
> - Maintainers would be nominated by the community and approved by SAT
> - Maintainers get +2 and merge rights in gerrit
> - gerrit will be adapted to:
> -- ignore the vote of the submitter/owner of the patch (no vote on
> own patch)
> -- votes become additive (e.g. +2 & +2 = +4)
> --- e.g. a +4 is required for merge
> --- up for discussion
> --- if +2 [=1*+2 merger review or as option 2*+1 normal
> reviews] --- or +4 [= 2*+2 merger review or as option 4*+1 normal
Hum I'm skeptical about adding. Actual flow pleases me.
> -- all src / staging repos need to go through gerrit reviews
> going forward (no more direct push)
I'm not in favor of that. This will not speed development as it
increase the count of reviews. But I can adapt me...
> Please tell us your thoughts about the above questions and the
> Best regards,
> Jan-Simon Möller
> AGL Release Manager
> automotive-discussions mailing list
> automotive-discussions at lists.linuxfoundation.org
More information about the automotive-discussions