On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Jeff Darcy <jda...@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
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
