Code review required for commits - formal Team vote.
idra at samba.org
Tue Oct 23 06:03:15 MDT 2012
On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 08:49 +0200, Michael Adam wrote:
> Hi Jeremy,
> Hi list,
> while the discussion about a formally committed test period seems
> to have been on hold to some extend for the last week or so,
> people have been busy discussing the more tool- and workflow-specific
> points of the review business. I have also sensed a great level
> of willingness to actually do reviews and work on th process.
> Some points that have been touched:
> tracking tool - patchwork:
> Simo has set up patchwork for the samba code.
> See the corresponding subthread for details.
> It looks rather promising. The only thing I am not quite
> certain about is the inability to track whole patchsets
> handed in by mail.
This came out funny, I think you meant:
patchwork can't handle multiple patches in a single mail message.
> git send-email:
> There have been various hints and discussions about
> using git send-email.
> It would be great to collect these on a wiki page.
can you create a page and send the link to the Mailing List ?
I will put my advice in there.
> commit messsage tags:
> Some of us had started to use "Signed-off-by: " as a
> tag for reviews in the commit messages. As pointed out
> by Simo, this is not what the Linux kernel uses Signed-off-by
> for. Here is a proposal, which summarizes our discussion:
> - The Author(s) of a patch should add their signature to
> the commit message by adding a "Signed-off-by: " tag.
> This tag indicates that the the person it lists was
> involved in the creation of the patch, that it is fine
> with the state of the patch and submits it under the
> license(s) of the affected files.
> - If the patch was done by various people, they can also
> add the "Pair-programmed-with: " tag.
Note that with 2 sign-offs this becomes effectively redundant, so I
would phase it out to keep things simple.
> - A reviewer should add a "Reviewed-by: " tag.
> Here is a reference for the linux kernel document describing
> the various tags used by linux:
> There is also the "Acked-by: " patch, but I suggest that we
> don't use it for now to keep things simple, since it does not
> make a lot of sense, unless we have established maintainers
> all over the code base and those need to Ack patches for their
> I also talked with some git folks, whether native support for
> adding "reviewed-by" like for "signed-off-by" coule be added
> to git, but I think chances are bad, because they say the don't
> want a reviewer to change the commit message and hence the
> commit object hash... They suggest to instead use merges and
> use the merge commit for indicating reviewed state. I
> personally don't like that very much, and think we should stay
> with the message-changing pick/rebase model for now.
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Principal Software Engineer at Red Hat, Inc. <simo at redhat.com>
More information about the samba-technical