[Gluster-devel] Reducing merge conflicts

[Pranith Kumar Karampuri]

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Jeff Darcy <jdarcy at redhat.com> wrote:

> > I absolutely hate what '-1' means though, it says 'I would prefer you
> > didn't submit this'. Somebody who doesn't know what he/she is doing still
> > goes ahead and sends his/her first patch and we say 'I would prefer you
> > didn't submit this'. It is like the tool is working against more
> > contributions. It could also say 'Thanks for your contribution, I feel we
> > can improve the patch further together' on -1 too you know.
>
> When it comes to what -1 means, I've noticed quite a bit of variation
> across the group.  Sometimes it means the person doesn't want it merged
> *yet* because of minor issues (including style).  Sometimes it means they
> think the whole idea or approach is fundamentally misguided and they'll
> need significant convincing before they'll even look at the details.  (I
> tend to use -2 for that, but that's just me.)  It's definitely bad the
> way the message is worded to imply that mere *submission* is unwelcome.
> If Gerrit supports it - sadly I don't think it does - I think we could
> have a much more constructive set of -1 reasons:
>
>  * Needs style or packaging fixes (e.g. missing bug ID).
>
>  * Needs a test.
>
>  * Needs fixes for real bugs found in review.
>
>  * Needs answers/explanations/comments.
>
>  * Needs coordination with other patch XXXX.
>
> Alternatively, we could adopt an official set of such reasons as a
> matter of convention, much like we do with including the component
> in the one-line summary.  Would that help?
>

Yes that will help. Are you saying we add it in the comments when we give
'-1'?


-- 
Pranith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20160715/88a279bf/attachment.html>