[U-Boot] u-boot gerrit server

[Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>]

Hi Vadim,

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 08:33:46 -0800, Vadim Bendebury (??)
<vbendeb@google.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
> <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net> wrote:
> > Hi Vadim,
> >
> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 21:21:27 -0800, Vadim Bendebury (??)
> > <vbendeb@google.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> For the purposes of this demo the patches submitted for review were
> >> generated  by a script I wrote. The script scrapes
> >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/, downloads the patches
> >> from there and tries applying them. Not all patches apply cleanly (as
> >> some of them are for branches).
> >
> > How do we intend to handle this? Will we move to a single
> > repository, with each patch getting reviewers assigned based on
> > which parts of the code it touches? Or move from repos to branches,
> > one per current custodian repo? Or something else yet?
> >
> 
> Hi Albert,
> 
> I *think* the way to go is to create multiple projects, one per
> custodian, such that the upload URLs are different.
> 
> >> If the patch applies cleanly, the script adds two stanzas to the patch
> >
> >>
> >> - Change-Id: generated by git
> >> - Patch-At: a reference to the patchwork page where the patch was
> >> downloaded from
> >
> > 'Patch-At' seem ininformative to me. Why not 'Patchwork-URL'?
> 
> It should not be there at all, scraping the patchwork is just a means
> of seeding the server with patches to show how this looks.
> 
> In the proper use case each user will puth their patches to the
> server, so there is no need in the cross reference to patchwork.
> >
> >> and uploads the patch for review as the user named 'Gerrit Tester'.
> >> Each upload creates a new git branch just for review purposes.
> >
> > (I'm skipping the gerrit workflow description here as I have
> > used gerrit extensively in my, ahem, previous job)
> >
> > I'm fine with using gerrit and yes, it can be a useful tool, not only
> > regarding review, but also for learning the whys and hows of code
> > changes through the comments from both reviewers and submitters
> > (and I am in strong favor of a policy that every reviewer comment
> > must be addressed by a supmitter reply, even the default will-do one.
> >
> 
> exactly, this is the main advantage IMO also, keeping track of changes
> and comments becomes so much more robust.
> 
> Also, gerrit allows to see diffs between patches, this is what email
> based review system can not easily deliver.
> 
> > One drawback though: I cannot seem to be able to use my U-Boot mail
> > address, even though it is a secondary address of my G+ account;
> > gerrit only wants to see my gmail address. I sure hope that I am not
> > required to use a gmail address to identify myself as the author
> > of my own patches within the U-Boot project.
> >
> 
> This should not be the case, but there are some kinks with multiple
> accounts. Can you try opening an 'incognito' window and sign up
> through it?

I did try anyway, but it did nothing, and that was quite predictable,
and here's why: I didn't mean gerrit got mixed up between two of my
Google+ accounts, as I only have one account, and can thus only log in
with this one. But This account's main address i a gmail one, and my
so-to-speak "U-Boot e-mail address", which I use for the ML, and in
'Copyright' lines in the U-Boot code base, and on Patchwork) is a
secondary address of my Google+ account. And gerrit does not know of my
secondary addresses, which make it unable to recognize me, once logged
in, as the submitter of patches posted under my "U-Boot" address.

> --vb

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.