On 26/06/2014, at 7:27 PM, Harshavardhana wrote:
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8181/ - posted a new change, wouldn't it
be worth to add this in smoke tests? rather than at ./rfc.sh ? - we
can provide a detailed summary - since we do not have 'commit/push'
style patch submission.
We can
Yeah, lets try this out. We can add the checkpatch.pl script to the
patch acceptance tests, and have an automatically triggered job that
runs it on patch submission. Should be pretty straightforward.
Let me work on the checkpatch script more to clean it up and make it
report properly for
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8181/ - posted a new change, wouldn't it
be worth to add this in smoke tests? rather than at ./rfc.sh ? - we
can provide a detailed summary - since we do not have 'commit/push'
style patch submission.
We can leverage our smoke tests, thoughts?
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014
Justin asked me, as the group's official Grumpy Old Man, to send a note
reminding people about the importance of reviewing patches early. Here
it is. As I see it, we've historically had two problems with reviews.
(1) Patches that don't get reviewed at all.
(2) Patches that have to be re-worked
On 26/06/2014, at 1:40 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
snip
While I agree with everything you said. Complaining about tabs/spaces should
be done by a script. Something like http://review.gluster.com/#/c/5404
+1
And we can use a git trigger to reject future patches that have tabs in
them.
On 26/06/2014, at 2:12 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
On 06/26/2014 06:19 AM, Justin Clift wrote:
On 26/06/2014, at 1:40 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:
snip
While I agree with everything you said. Complaining about tabs/spaces
should be done by a script. Something like
