[Gluster-devel] [Gluster-Maintainers] 'Reviewd-by' tag for commits

Pranith Kumar Karampuri pkarampu at redhat.com
Mon Oct 3 01:11:35 UTC 2016

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Ravishankar N <ravishankar at redhat.com>

> On 09/30/2016 06:38 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 07:11:51AM +0530, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
> hi,
>      At the moment 'Reviewed-by' tag comes only if a +1 is given on the
> final version of the patch. But for most of the patches, different people
> would spend time on different versions making the patch better, they may
> not get time to do the review for every version of the patch. Is it
> possible to change the gerrit script to add 'Reviewed-by' for all the
> people who participated in the review?
> +1 to this. For the argument that this *might* encourage me-too +1s, it
> only exposes
> such persons in bad light.
> Or removing 'Reviewed-by' tag completely would also help to make sure it
> doesn't give skewed counts.
> I'm not going to lie, for me, that takes away the incentive of doing any
> reviews at all.

Could you elaborate why? May be you should also talk about your primary
motivation for doing reviews.

I would not feel comfortable automatically adding Reviewed-by tags for
> people that did not review the last version. They may not agree with the
> last version, so adding their "approved stamp" on it may not be correct.
> See the description of Reviewed-by in the Linux kernel sources [0].
> While the Linux kernel model is the poster child for projects to draw
> standards
> from, IMO, their email based review system is certainly not one to
> emulate. It
> does not provide a clean way to view patch-set diffs, does not present a
> single
> URL based history that tracks all review comments, relies on the sender to
> provide information on what changed between versions, allows a variety of
> 'Komedians' [1] to add random tags which may or may not be picked up
> by the maintainer who takes patches in etc.
> Maybe we can add an additional tag that mentions all the people that
> did do reviews of older versions of the patch. Not sure what the tag
> would be, maybe just CC?
> It depends on what tags would be processed to obtain statistics on review
> contributions.
> I agree that not all reviewers might be okay with the latest revision but
> that
> % might be miniscule (zero, really) compared to the normal case where the
> reviewer spent
> considerable time and effort to provide feedback (and an eventual +1) on
> previous
> revisions. If converting all +1s into 'Reviewed-by's is not feasible in
> gerrit
> or is not considered acceptable, then the maintainer could wait for a
> reasonable
> time for reviewers to give +1 for the final revision before he/she goes
> ahead
> with a +2 and merges it. While we cannot wait indefinitely for all acks, a
> comment
> like 'LGTM, will wait for a day for other acks before I go ahead and
> merge' would be
> appreciated.
> Enough of bike-shedding from my end I suppose.:-)
> Ravi
> [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/503829/
> Niels
> 0. http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/SubmittingPatches#n552
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing listGluster-devel at gluster.orghttp://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20161003/650c504d/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-devel mailing list