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.
This is easily accomplished with adding "-s" to your git-am run.
This can make it
easy to ask that person 'hey, I am hitting this problem after that
patch, did you see this when you tested it?'. Right now, it is a
matter of combingthe list to find the ack, and if you delete your
local copies of pushed patches (as I do), that means going to the
archive, just t see who reviewed a patch so you can ask them a
question. I would personally much rather just do 'git log' and see
who it was, so I can get hold of them as needed. Thoughts, concerns,
vehement opposition? General apathy?
Actually, I think I do have some opposition. :-\ Adding a signed-off-by
line is nice, but it implies that the reviewer is the one that pushes.
This is all well and good, except I think that we're going to have to
start juggling multiple branches soon, as we backport things to
maintenance branches.
Compounding matters, I don't think many people really enjoy doing patch
reviews -- it's just something we begrudgingly do to help get patches
approved. (I can't say I speak for everyone, but I do know that given
the choice of writing code or reviewing someone's patch, I'm not the
only one that would choose to keep coding.) If reviewing someone's patch
suddenly saddles you with the responsibility of figuring out what
branches it needs to go onto, pushing it to all of them, and resolving
any conflicts that might arise, it's going to become considerably more
unappealing than it already is.
Just MHO, of course.
-- Matt