[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] docs: Document optional GitLab code review process

[Matt Turner]

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 7:45 PM Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen at intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 2018-11-27 19:20:09, Matt Turner wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:13 PM Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen at intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > This documents a mechanism for using GitLab Merge Requests as an
> > > optional, secondary way to get code reviews for patchsets.
> > >
> > > We still require all patches to be emailed.
> > >
> > > Aside from the potential usage for code review comments, it might also
> > > help reviewers to find unmerged patchsets which need review. (Assuming
> > > it doesn't fall into the same fate of patchwork with hundreds of open
> > > MRs.)
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen at intel.com>
> > > Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason at jlekstrand.net>
> > > ---
> > >  docs/submittingpatches.html | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/docs/submittingpatches.html b/docs/submittingpatches.html
> > > index 5d8ba443191..852f28c198a 100644
> > > --- a/docs/submittingpatches.html
> > > +++ b/docs/submittingpatches.html
> > > @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> > >  <li><a href="#testing">Testing Patches</a>
> > >  <li><a href="#mailing">Mailing Patches</a>
> > >  <li><a href="#reviewing">Reviewing Patches</a>
> > > +<li><a href="#gitlab">GitLab Merge Requests</a>
> > >  <li><a href="#nominations">Nominating a commit for a stable branch</a>
> > >  <li><a href="#criteria">Criteria for accepting patches to the stable branch</a>
> > >  <li><a href="#backports">Sending backports for the stable branch</a>
> > > @@ -282,6 +283,30 @@ which tells the patch author that the patch can be committed, as long
> > >  as the issues are resolved first.
> > >  </p>
> > >
> > > +<h2 id="gitlab">GitLab Merge Requests</h2>
> > > +
> > > +<p>
> > > +  <a href="https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa">GitLab</a> Merge
> > > +  Requests (MR) can be used as an optional, secondary method of
> > > +  obtaining code review for patches.
> > > +</p>
> > > +
> > > +<ul>
> > > +  <li>All patches should be submitted using email as well
> > > +  <li>Consider including a link to the MR in your email based
> > > +    cover-letter
> > > +  <li>Address code review from both email and the MR
> >
> > Discussion point: I think attempting to have simultaneous review in
> > two places is a recipe for wasted time.
>
> That's possible. It also happens on email sometimes. But, I want to
> say that maybe the usual problem is too little code review, and not
> too much? :)
>
> > Strawman: maybe we can only email the cover letter to the mailing
> > list and include in it a link to the MR?
>
> I was hoping to make a smaller step and see what happens. Maybe this
> will give people the chance to try out MR based reviews, but not take
> away email based reviews just yet.
>
> I don't think we should move away from email based reviews until we
> are sure MR's actually work better. (I'm far from convinced on this
> point. :)

That's fair.