EXT: Re: [PATCH wayland v2] contributing: use Gitlab merge request workflow
Pekka Paalanen
ppaalanen at gmail.com
Thu Mar 7 12:41:18 UTC 2019
On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 07:33:01 -0600
Derek Foreman <derek.foreman.wayland at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 04:49, Ray, Ian (GE Healthcare) <ian.ray at ge.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 6 Mar 2019, at 11.28, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Going once, going twice...
> > >
> > > Any objections? More acks?
>
> Acked-by: Derek Foreman <derek.foreman.wayland at gmail.com>
>
> Personally, I really see no harm in pushing this during code freeze,
> since it's not code. :)
Nice, this was the final nail I was looking for, pushed:
15cba8b..808bca8 master -> master
And merge requests are enabled now!
Thanks,
pq
> > > Let's say I'll push this and enable MRs on Friday if there are no
> > > further comments. More acks and I might do it sooner. :-)
> > >
> > >
> >
> > LGTM
> >
> > Acked-by: Ian Ray <ian.ray at ge.com>
> >
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > pq
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 12:35:09 +0200
> > > Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> From: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen at collabora.com>
> > >>
> > >> The experience from Weston shows that the Gitlab merge request based workflow
> > >> works really well. Recently there have also been issues with the mailing list
> > >> that have made the email based workflow more painful than it used to be. Those
> > >> issues might have been temporary or occasional, but they probably are only
> > >> going to increase.
> > >>
> > >> The MR workflow is different, it has its issues
> > >> (https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/freedesktop/freedesktop/issues/74) and we
> > >> likely lose the explicit Reviewed-by etc. tags from commit messages, but it is
> > >> also much easier to work with: no more whitespace damaged patches, lost email,
> > >> setting up git-send-email; we gain automated CI before any human reviewer even
> > >> looks at anything, and people can jump in to an ongoing discussion even if they
> > >> weren't subscribed before.
> > >>
> > >> If you still want email, you can subscribe to that selectively(!) in Gitlab
> > >> yourself.
> > >>
> > >> This text has been copied from Weston's CONTRIBUTING.md of the 5.0.91 release
> > >> and slightly altered for Wayland.
> > >>
> > >> Fixes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland/issues/49
> > >>
> > >> v2: fixed two left-over mentions of Weston
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen at collabora.com>
> > >> v1 Reviewed-by: Simon Ser <contact at emersion.fr>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Daniel Stone <daniels at collabora.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> CONTRIBUTING.md | 147 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> > >> 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md
> > >> index 686ed63..dcc9f56 100644
> > >> --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md
> > >> +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md
> > >> @@ -4,8 +4,46 @@ Contributing to Wayland
> > >> Sending patches
> > >> ---------------
> > >>
> > >> -Patches should be sent to **wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org**, using
> > >> -`git send-email`. See [git documentation] for help.
> > >> +Patches should be sent via
> > >> +[GitLab merge requests](https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/gitlab-basics/add-merge-request.html).
> > >> +Wayland is
> > >> +[hosted on freedesktop.org's GitLab](https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland/):
> > >> +in order to submit code, you should create an account on this GitLab instance,
> > >> +fork the core Wayland repository, push your changes to a branch in your new
> > >> +repository, and then submit these patches for review through a merge request.
> > >> +
> > >> +Wayland formerly accepted patches via `git-send-email`, sent to
> > >> +**wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org**; these were
> > >> +[tracked using Patchwork](https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/wayland/).
> > >> +Some old patches continue to be sent this way, and we may accept small new
> > >> +patches sent to the list, but please send all new patches through GitLab merge
> > >> +requests.
> > >> +
> > >> +
> > >> +Formatting and separating commits
> > >> +---------------------------------
> > >> +
> > >> +Unlike many projects using GitHub and GitLab, Wayland has a
> > >> +[linear, 'recipe' style history](http://www.bitsnbites.eu/git-history-work-log-vs-recipe/).
> > >> +This means that every commit should be small, digestible, stand-alone, and
> > >> +functional. Rather than a purely chronological commit history like this:
> > >> +
> > >> + connection: plug a fd leak
> > >> + plug another fd leak
> > >> + connection: init fds to -1
> > >> + close all fds
> > >> + refactor checks into a new function
> > >> + don't close fds we handed out
> > >> +
> > >> +we aim to have a clean history which only reflects the final state, broken up
> > >> +into functional groupings:
> > >> +
> > >> + connection: Refactor out closure allocation
> > >> + connection: Clear fds we shouldn't close to -1
> > >> + connection: Make wl_closure_destroy() close fds of undispatched closures
> > >> +
> > >> +This ensures that the final patch series only contains the final state,
> > >> +without the changes and missteps taken along the development process.
> > >>
> > >> The first line of a commit message should contain a prefix indicating
> > >> what part is affected by the patch followed by one sentence that
> > >> @@ -45,7 +83,7 @@ We won't reject patches that lack S-o-b, but it is strongly recommended.
> > >>
> > >> When you re-send patches, revised or not, it would be very good to document the
> > >> changes compared to the previous revision in the commit message and/or the
> > >> -cover letter. If you have already received Reviewed-by or Acked-by tags, you
> > >> +merge request. If you have already received Reviewed-by or Acked-by tags, you
> > >> should evaluate whether they still apply and include them in the respective
> > >> commit messages. Otherwise the tags may be lost, reviewers miss the credit they
> > >> deserve, and the patches may cause redundant review effort.
> > >> @@ -54,78 +92,37 @@ deserve, and the patches may cause redundant review effort.
> > >> Tracking patches and following up
> > >> ---------------------------------
> > >>
> > >> -[Wayland Patchwork](http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/wayland/list/) is
> > >> -used for tracking patches to Wayland. Xwayland patches are tracked with the
> > >> -[Xorg project](https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/Xorg/list/)
> > >> -instead. Weston uses
> > >> -[GitLab merge requests](https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/merge_requests)
> > >> -for code review, and does not use mailing list review at all.
> > >> -
> > >> -Libinput patches, even though they use the same mailing list as
> > >> -Wayland, are not tracked in the Wayland Patchwork.
> > >> -
> > >> -The following applies only to Wayland.
> > >> -
> > >> -If a patch is not found in Patchwork, there is a high possibility for it to be
> > >> -forgotten. Patches attached to bug reports or not arriving to the mailing list
> > >> -because of e.g. subscription issues will not be in Patchwork because Patchwork
> > >> -only collects patches sent to the list.
> > >> -
> > >> -When you send a revised version of a patch, it would be very nice to mark your
> > >> -old patch as superseded (or rejected, if that is applicable). You can change
> > >> -the status of your own patches by registering to Patchwork - ownership is
> > >> -identified by email address you use to register. Updating your patch status
> > >> -appropriately will help maintainer work.
> > >> -
> > >> -The following patch states are found in Patchwork:
> > >> -
> > >> -- **New**:
> > >> - Patches under discussion or not yet processed.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Under review**:
> > >> - Mostly unused state.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Accepted**:
> > >> - The patch is merged in the master branch upstream, as is or slightly
> > >> - modified.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Rejected**:
> > >> - The idea or approach is rejected and cannot be fixed by revising
> > >> - the patch.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **RFC**:
> > >> - Request for comments, not meant to be merged as is.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Not applicable**:
> > >> - The email was not actually a patch, or the patch is not for Wayland.
> > >> - Libinput patches are usually automatically ignored by Wayland
> > >> - Patchwork, but if they get through, they will be marked as Not
> > >> - applicable.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Changes requested**:
> > >> - Reviewers determined that changes to the patch are needed. The
> > >> - submitter is expected to send a revised version. (You should
> > >> - not wait for your patch to be set to this state before revising,
> > >> - though.)
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Awaiting upstream**:
> > >> - Mostly unused as the patch is waiting for upstream actions but
> > >> - is not shown in the default list, which means it is easy to
> > >> - overlook.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Superseded**:
> > >> - A revised version of the patch has been submitted.
> > >> -
> > >> -- **Deferred**:
> > >> - Used mostly during freeze periods before releases, to temporarily
> > >> - hide patches that cannot be merged during a freeze.
> > >> -
> > >> -Note, that in the default listing, only patches in *New* or *Under review* are
> > >> -shown.
> > >> -
> > >> -There is also a command line interface to Patchwork called `pwclient`, see
> > >> -http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/wayland/
> > >> -for links where to get it and the sample `.pwclientrc` for Wayland.
> > >> +Once submitted to GitLab, your patches will be reviewed by the Wayland
> > >> +development team on GitLab. Review may be entirely positive and result in your
> > >> +code landing instantly, in which case, great! You're done. However, we may ask
> > >> +you to make some revisions: fixing some bugs we've noticed, working to a
> > >> +slightly different design, or adding documentation and tests.
> > >> +
> > >> +If you do get asked to revise the patches, please bear in mind the notes above.
> > >> +You should use `git rebase -i` to make revisions, so that your patches follow
> > >> +the clear linear split documented above. Following that split makes it easier
> > >> +for reviewers to understand your work, and to verify that the code you're
> > >> +submitting is correct.
> > >> +
> > >> +A common request is to split single large patch into multiple patches. This can
> > >> +happen, for example, if when adding a new feature you notice a bug elsewhere
> > >> +which you need to fix to progress. Separating these changes into separate
> > >> +commits will allow us to verify and land the bugfix quickly, pushing part of
> > >> +your work for the good of everyone, whilst revision and discussion continues on
> > >> +the larger feature part. It also allows us to direct you towards reviewers who
> > >> +best understand the different areas you are working on.
> > >> +
> > >> +When you have made any requested changes, please rebase the commits, verify
> > >> +that they still individually look good, then force-push your new branch to
> > >> +GitLab. This will update the merge request and notify everyone subscribed to
> > >> +your merge request, so they can review it again.
> > >> +
> > >> +There are also
> > >> +[many GitLab CLI clients](https://about.gitlab.com/applications/#cli-clients),
> > >> +if you prefer to avoid the web interface. It may be difficult to follow review
> > >> +comments without using the web interface though, so we do recommend using this
> > >> +to go through the review process, even if you use other clients to track the
> > >> +list of available patches.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Coding style
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > wayland-devel mailing list
> > > wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > wayland-devel mailing list
> > wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/attachments/20190307/ecd3a522/attachment.sig>
More information about the wayland-devel
mailing list