[Spice-devel] [PATCH spice-protocol] build-sys: simplify autogen

[Christophe Fergeau]

On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 04:52:49PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> By that I mean that they are aware of the responsability of doing
> unreview commit.

Yup, except we disagree on the importance of good commit messages for
example.

> 
> >
> >> Nothing like replacing a crufted autogen with an obvious autoreconf.
> >
> > Is this what you did? This is not what I read in the commit log.
> 
> "Use autoreconf, allow out of tree autogen.sh run."

Nowhere it says that you just got rid of the existing autogen.sh and
replaced it with something else, you only say 'simplify'

> 
> >
> >> Quick for me is a matter of minutes.
> >
> > Even if it's a few hours, or a few days, is it a big deal?
> 
> That's a big factor, yes.

What is so bad with having a commit delayed for a few hours while it's
waiting for reviews?

> Also, you can see that other projects have troubles with that, ex
> http://wiki.qemu.org/Contribute/TrivialPatches: they are moving the
> problem to me, but perhaps it helps.

QEMU is a much bigger project though. I don't think there is much point
looking at other projects, some are doing mandatory reviews, some are
doing free for all commits, some are using mailing lists, others are
using tools for patch tracking, ... And some are doing exactly what we
do currently, with everyone agreeing to send all their patches for
review before pushing.

> 
> >> Improving the change can be done immediately upstream or by a
> >> after-commit review. That's not a valid argument.
> >
> > With pre-commit review, you ensure that at least one person read the
> > patch. With post-commit review, you have no such guarantee.
> 
> With current workflow, you have no guaratee that unreviewed patch go
> there by mistake or maliciously. We would need a tool for that.
> For me this is the job of maintainer to quickly review each commit
> before release.

Not sure what you are getting at, 'quickly review' here could mean
glance at the shortlog given the context. And this definitely does not
scale, and you don't want to discover issues at release time. We also
have spice-commits for this scenario.

> Btw, do you apply your own rules in your own projects?

I don't really have a project of mine in mind where a second person is
actively involved, which is a prerequisite to set up such a system.
I'd be happy to switch to that model if I had the opportunity. If
someone was to take over libgovirt maintainance, I'd be happy to send
patches before committing.

Christophe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/attachments/20141205/8fcbc0a7/attachment.sig>