From: Torne Wuff <torne+rockboxdev_at_wolfpuppy.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 11:09:25 +0100

On 7 September 2011 08:48, Thomas Jarosch <tomj_at_simonv.com> wrote:
> Second this. Can gerrit be configured to request a review optionally?
> Let's say one touches an unfamiliar area of the code (f.e. tagcache),
> then it would be nice to request a review.

That's how I am intending to configure it. It's up to you at the time
you push to the server (assuming you are a committer): if you push to
refs/heads/master then it is submitted to the master branch
immediately; if you push to refs/for/master then it creates a review.
You can't submit a change that's been uploaded for review *though
Gerrit* unless it has been reviewed, but you can still submit it
directly by pushing it a second time to refs/heads/master (which
closes the review automatically as it will notice it's been merged) if
you change your mind about whether you needed a review :)


Anyway. My view on this whole discussion is that I like the idea of
requiring reviews in principle, but introducing this policy *now*
would be crazy. We should make the tool available for people to use as
they want, and see what happens. If people find that reviewing changes
is a thing that actually happens reasonably often, and a significant
number of committers choose to have a significant number of their
changes reviewed voluntarily, then maybe we should discuss requiring
reviews at that point, but right now we are already changing a number
of aspects of our workflow because of the tool changes and it's
already asking quite a lot of everybody to keep up with that. This is
a pretty mature project with established ways of working, and changing
too many things at a time without any chance to actually test things
out is going to cause a lot of unhappiness.

-- 
Torne Wuff
torne_at_wolfpuppy.org.uk

Received on 2011-09-07