From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Code reviews Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 05:15:38 +0100 Message-ID: <87d1r5a9lh.fsf@wanadoo.es> References: <56BE7E37.3090708@cs.ucla.edu> <4hd1rw1ubr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83vb50wxhv.fsf@gnu.org> <87y49vz4cg.fsf@acer.localhost.com> <87vb4zb0i4.fsf@gnu.org> <837fheuu6a.fsf@gnu.org> <877fheb1rh.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ziua9mwq.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83h9git36k.fsf@gnu.org> <87vb4y9ep9.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83a8mat2aa.fsf@gnu.org> <87r3fm9du0.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457410567 5441 80.91.229.3 (8 Mar 2016 04:16:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 04:16:07 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 08 05:15:58 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ad93t-0008A3-Hw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 05:15:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60075 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ad93s-0002IF-Ix for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 23:15:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53384) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ad93p-0002Hj-5v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 23:15:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ad93k-0004Fw-6q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 23:15:53 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:60913) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ad93j-0004Fm-WD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 23:15:48 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ad93h-00081I-Rr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 05:15:45 +0100 Original-Received: from 151.red-79-153-146.dynamicip.rima-tde.net ([79.153.146.151]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 05:15:45 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 151.red-79-153-146.dynamicip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 05:15:45 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 37 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.red-79-153-146.dynamicip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.92 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:cRj5hOHNLETkyzJWwgvvLsezI6M= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:201117 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >> Introduce code reviews. Don't give commit access to the "golden" >> branches to everyone, just to a few top contributors and reviewers. > > We already have a fair bit of patches submitted and lingering in limbo > forever until someone (almost always the same someone, BTW) finally > loses hope that some of the other contributors take care of it. > > If we could switch to a system where every patch is reviewed before > commit, that'd be great. My own impression is that it will kill the > development pace because too few people are willing to spend the > corresponding efforts. > > That's why I've followed a practice of giving out write access very > liberally, with "post-commit spot-check reviews" instead. Indeed, it > means that errors in commit messages can't be fixed (we can fix them in > the ChangeLog files, admittedly, but since I don't use them it doesn't > help me). > > Maybe we could have a half-way system, where commits are pushed to > a branch that is "not fast-forward-only", Something like this is what I meant with "Don't give commit access to the golden branches to everyone". Anyways, you can't expect having high quality commit logs (or VC history at all, take a look at the DAG to see what I mean) and give write access liberally. Having ChangeLogs as a compromise is absurd: you have to proof-read and fix them anyway. Correct or reject the real thing (the commit) instead. I guess that asking for a review queue is out of the question, although I'm afraid that it would not turn to be a good thing since some people here tend to be quite picky when reviewing foreign contributions (with the best of the intentions, but I can attest from personal experience that being the subject of one of those reviews can be disheartening.) [snip]