On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:20:01PM -0400, Jason Guiditta wrote:
On 16/05/12 11:28 -0400, Matt Wagner wrote:
>On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 10:03:17AM -0400, Jason Guiditta wrote:
>>Hey, list, had a thought on pushing patches. I have noticed some
>>people (inconsistently) pushing patches others send after they review
>>them, and adding a 'signed-off by' to the patch. I kind of like this,
>>as it adds a simple way to see who reviewed a patch.
>
[snip]
This is where I invoke Hugh. Reviewing patches is part of everybody's
job (at least those of us at RH, external community would be
different), and if people are not seeing that, I am sure a manager
will contact
them shortly. I think 'git am -s', and then 'git push' assuming the
patch passes review is not a particularly onerous task. Again, my
suggestion is meaning reviewer pushes to master only, anything else is
out of scope.
/me waves ><}}}*> threateningly...
I'm pretty sure everyone understands the importance to the welfare of
the project of taking time to do patch review. It is what separates us
from the closed-source world...
--H
--
== Hugh Brock, hbrock(a)redhat.com ==
== Engineering Manager, Cloud BU ==
== Aeolus Project: Manage virtual infrastructure across clouds. ==
==
http://aeolusproject.org ==
"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m
not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."
--Robert McCloskey