On 3/8/13 11:30 AM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 08:54:05AM -0800, Alex Huang wrote: >> > >> > I'd add: >> > Large scale of our code base >> > Difficulty of testing at scale without plenty of hardware (which was >>a problem >> > stated during incubation proposal) >> >> I'm going to start off a branch specifically to do BVT on simulator >>and devCloud so that we can at least have system vms/vrs and business >>logic tested. >> >> Specific hardware will be different but should be a much smaller part >>of our code base. Also I believe specific hardware code can be broken >>but mostly won't affect others. Here the main concern is changes >>impacting the developer community at large. >> > >I think that David is referring to the larger CI aspects of things. If >we were to adopt gerrit, it would be best used (given Hugo's concerns) >as a gate into master (or x branches) after successful CI tests. Hugo's >concern was that he not be blocked, waiting for another timezone to wake >up and review commits. > >IMO, our best path to success here is to have a couple of different >scenarios: > >1 - Contributors (non-committers) submit a patch that will be tested >within a CI environment, but must also be reviewed / approved by at least >one >committer, before being pushed into the repo. > >2 - Committers submit a patch that will be tested within a CI >environment before being pushed into the repo. > >Optionally, committers need to be able to request that another reviewer >approve the patch before it's pushed (this helps with collaboration). Nice. I like it.
