gerrit lame / non-reviews ...

Bjoern Michaelsen bjoern.michaelsen at
Mon Jul 9 07:23:59 PDT 2012

Hi Michael,

On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 01:29:42PM +0100, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi guys,
> On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 10:28 +0000, Gerrit wrote:
> > Björn Michaelsen has posted comments on this change.
> 	Let me pick on Bjoern because he is a big guy :-)

I only have havy bones!!1!eleven

> > Change subject: renamed German variables (in sw/source/core/crsr/)
> > ......................................................................
> > Patch Set 1: Looks good to me, but someone else must approve
> 	Until we can either turn down the gerrit fire-hose;

Done. I unchecked the "All comments" checkbox on the firehose, leaving only
"New Changes" and "Submitted Changes" in place for now.
If you want a full personal spammage still, go to "Settings->Watched Projects"
and add whatever you want there.

> 	*please* have some consideration for the people on this list.

Since the firehose has been throttled, it should be ok to comment
lightheartedly on gerrit. See it as some training on the job. After a few
innocent "+1"s there, you should feel more confident to merge a patch directly.

> 	If you would not send a content-free mail of a dozen lines saying "me
> too" - then please do not do bogus/empty "looks good to me but doesn't
> close or merge the patch" type reviews.

Yes, I _should_ have used +2 approved there, as I fully intend to merge this
myself. mea culpa.

> 	If you agree a patch looks good; just merge it. If you like the look of
> it but are not sure - please consider staying quiet for now :-) I (for
> one) don't want to have a +1 infested Apache-style list full of poorly
> quoted context and almost no signal :-)

In this case, it was a bit more tricky as some of the patches this one depended
on were rejected, thus requiring a rebase. I intended to say "dont look at
this, I am already on this one" with the +1. Indeed that was wrong, I should
have used +2 approve, which avoids the confusion.

> it avoids someone else having to do that work, and worse a ton of people
> having to read their mailbox full of big mail with ~identical subjects
> many with banal content.

We are piping the mails through a python script and have the mail parsed. I
really should dump that in dev-tools, because then we can reenable the comment
firehose and do some heuristics on them (e.g. more than 3 words of text etc.)
so that we get the content comments, but leave out the noise.



More information about the LibreOffice mailing list