[Spice-devel] Proposal: review branches (was Re: [vdagent-win PATCH v6 2/5] Initial rewrite of image conversion code)

[Christophe de Dinechin]

> On 27 Jul 2017, at 17:08, Frediano Ziglio <fziglio at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Try to sum up the initial problem was patches/series tracking
> 
> So far there are 3 proposal
> 1) PR/MR (GitLab/GitHub style)
> 2) patchew
> 3a) shared git repository
> 3b) links to external git repositories
> 
> 1) PR surely can trace the status of series and is ready to
>   use with small initial setup. Not clear if we would like
>   to do reviews with it;

Not many answers to my survey yet, but so far a consensus that
patches should be sent to the mailing list, which I interpret as
an indication that people are comfortable with mail-based reviews.


> 2) similar to patchwork with additional feature but missing
>   the state tracking part. Maybe would be not hard to add;

To me, addresses a different issue, so I would propose both 1 and 2.
Specifically, 1 addresses the server side (managing CI items, list of branches
under review, build status, etc), whereas 2 addresses the mail side
(turning patches into “CI items”).


> 3a) Many disagree as not really git ideal and about
>    external contributions;
> 3b) Does this improve knowing the state of series? Maybe
>    for internal developers only.

I think that 1 implies 3, doesn’t it?

> 
> 3a/3b seems quite manual job to do and not much solving
> the state tracking (although solve other issues), maybe
> some ideas could improve the current procedure.
> 
> Maybe would be worth speaking with patchew author if
> is easy doable and agree with the change.
> 
> IMHO the "closest" (more suitable and easy to implement)
> is 1.

Agreed. But I think 2 would be a valuable addition, notably as
an efficient way to deal with smaller patches.


Thanks,
Christophe
> 
> Frediano
> _______________________________________________
> Spice-devel mailing list
> Spice-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel