[Mesa-dev] Workflow Proposal

[Alyssa Rosenzweig]

> > >>  Upstream should do what's best for upstream, not for Intel's "unique"
> > >>  management.
> > >>
> > >>    Not sure how from Emma explaining how Rb tags were used by Intel
> > >>    management it came the conclusion that it were used in that way only by
> > >>    Intel management. Spoiler: it is not.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I'll make that point more emphatic.
> > >
> > > Upstream must do what's best for upstream without zero regard for the
> > > whims of management. Doubly so for bad management.
> >
> > If the r-b process ever had any notice from any company's management, I
> > haven't seen it. (Actually, I think most management would rather have
> > the short sighted view of skipping code review to more quickly merge
> > patches.) In terms of who to "track down", that is also a tenuous
> > connection.
> 
> All of the above is true but also totally irrelevant to the actual discussion.
> 
> When R-b as a metric came up at the time of the first switch, I wrote
> a really trivial Python script which used the GitLab API to scrape MR
> discussions and pull 'Reviewed-by: ...' comments out and print a
> leaderboard for number of reviewed MRs over the past calendar month.
> Adapting that to look at approvals rather than comments would cut it
> down to about 10 LoC.
> 
> Whether it's Reviewed-by in the trailer or an approval, both are
> explicitly designed to be machine readable, which means it's trivial
> to turn it into a metric if you want to. Whether or not that's a good
> idea is the problem of whoever wields it.

Fair enough. I don't have strong views on the tags themselves. If
upstream has good reasons to use them, let's use them; if upstream has
good reasons to omit them, let's omit them.

What I oppose is management metrics playing a role in upstream's
discussion. That goes for any company's management; I do not mean to
single out Intel here.

But given the aforementioned script, even the managers will be happy
either way. My apologies for prolonging what in retrospect is a silly
discussion.