[oi-dev] oi-build review process

[Alasdair Lumsden]

Hi Guido,

On 08/ 5/11 11:42 PM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:
> Hello,
>
> looking at the first review for oi-build I think it is suboptimal
> that changes put up for review are already committed, changes
> requested by reviewers can lead to a number of additional commits
> which show up in the master repo and make changes more difficult
> to follow, furthermore I would find it desirable to have
> Reviewed-by headers in the commit message documenting our review
> process. I'm not familiar with how Bitbucket works but off the
> top of my head I can think of a number of solutions, changes
> could be kept in MQ during review and then be turned into commits
> before integration, there is a histedit Mercurial extension,
> there is webrev and there may be further options.
>
> It would also be nice to define some minimum time period for
> which stuff is put up for review in order to give interested
> parties enough time to look at changes.
>
> Any thoughts/opinions on this?

I was expecting the committer to use "hg pull --no-commit" and pull each 
of the changesets from bitbucket, then commit and push to the master 
repo - that way there is only one commit per change. In the commit 
message it can reference the author + reviewers.

The beauty of using bitbucket is that it makes it really easy for new 
less seasoned developers to contribute, and using "--no-commit" solves 
the "messy commits" issue.

I don't view MQs or webrevs as viable - they are too fiddley/difficult 
for casual contributors. This has to be super easy, and bitbucket is 
super easy for people to push changes to.

Cheers,

Alasdair