Hi, On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 11:51:00PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 11:24 PM Tom Tromey <t...@tromey.com> wrote: > > Jason> Someone mentioned earlier that gerrit was previously tried > > Jason> unsuccessfully. > > > > We tried it and gdb and then abandoned it. We tried to integrate it > > into the traditional gdb development style, having it send email to > > gdb-patches. I found these somewhat hard to read and in the end we > > agreed not to use it. > > > > I've come around again to thinking we should probably abandon email > > instead. For me the main benefit is that gerrit has patch tracking, > > unlike our current system, where losing patches is fairly routine. > > Indeed. Though Patchwork is another option for patch tracking, that glibc > seem to be having success with.
Patchworks works if you have people that like it and keep on top of it. For elfutils Aaron and I are probably the only ones that use it, but if we just go over it once a week it keeps being managable and nobody else needs to care. That is also why it seems to work for glibc. If you can carve out an hour a week going over the submitted patches and delegate them then it is a really useful patch tracking tool. Obviously that only works if the patch flow isn't overwhelming to begin with... I'll work with Sergio who setup the original gerrit instance to upgrade it to the latest gerrit version so people try it out. One nice thing he did was to automate self-service user registration. Although that is one of the things I don't really like about it. As Tom said it feels like gerrit is an all or nothing solution that has to be mandated to be used and requires everybody to have a centralized login. But if you do want that then how Sergio set it up is pretty nice. It is just one more thing to monitor for spam accounts... Cheers, Mark
