Re: Switching SCM to git and commit/review policy

[Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>]

pHilipp Zabel wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Richard Purdie<rpurdie@rpsys.net>  wrote:

>> As always, there is a but. This change is conditional on being able to
>> come up with a sensible commit and review policy for OE.dev. The core
>> team does feel that the metadata quality has dropped over time in some
>> areas and we need to have a better review process. The change to an SCM
>> with good branch support is a vital part of this but not the only part.
>>
>> We've not made any decisions on what the commit/review policy should be,
>> this is open for discussion. We're thinking it may take the form of some
>> kind of kernel style Signed-off-by: tags and a switch to a partially
>> pull based model rather than just push based as we use monotone so more
>> than one developer handles any given change.
>
> Personally, I'd like to see every patch to OE being sent to and
> reviewed on the mailing list.

I'd like to see that every commit has at least 2 SOBs, I care less on 
how they get there. Having the review out in the open should be the end 
goal, though.

> About a pull based model, wouldn't we need something like the kernels'
> subsystem maintainers to share the load? Seeing that there already
> seems to be a serious manpower problem, who would have the time to do
> that?

Not that RP says "*partially* pull based model rather than just push 
based", which means that bigger changes get done on a branch (e.g. 
libtool update, Xorg updates, etc) and get pulled in after a review.

regards,

Koen