[PATCH wayland 0/2] Document review and commit access requirements

[Derek Foreman]

On 2018-06-18 08:42 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> From: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen at collabora.co.uk>
> 
> Hi,
> 
> for years we have relied on unwritten traditions on how to review
> patches. Gaining commit access has been a secret rite no-one really knew
> what was required for to ask or grant it. I would dare claim that this
> has been partially the reason for why there are so few people who
> routinely review and land patches. At least I hope so, because
> "unwritten" is something we can fix.
> 
> Let's try to write down the existing conventions and criteria we use to
> review patches. These will not be rules to be followed to the letter but
> to the spirit.
> 
> Once we have documented guidelines for quality assurance on patch
> review, we can set up rules for granting commit rights. The movement to
> document commit rights requirements started in the kernel DRM commmunity
> as a tool to give out commits rights to more people and get more people
> involved and reviewing patches. I believe we would certainly want more
> people involved with Wayland and Weston, but it won't work if we don't
> also get more reviewers and committers.
> 
> So here goes. Documenting what is expected from reviewers and commmit
> rights holders should make everyone's lives easier. These patches are my
> first take on it, and build on others' as referenced. I want to ensure
> that I am replaceable. That everyone is.
> 
> The guidelines will not be perfect from the start. They should we honed
> over time.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> pq
> 
> 
> Pekka Paalanen (2):
>   contributing: add review guidelines
>   contributing: commit rights

Really like these, and both are:
Reviewed-by: Derek Foreman <derek.foreman.samsung at gmail.com>

I like Daniel's suggestions too, but am fine with those being follow up
work.

Thanks,
Derek

> 
>  CONTRIBUTING.md | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 82 insertions(+)
>