On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 04:12:37PM +0000, Blue Swirl wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > I'd like to discuss two questions related to changes that >> > are committed to the shared tree. >> > 1. A lot of patches are committed without being posted >> > to the list first, thus they go in without review. >> > Why is this good? Can this be addressed? >> >> Good or bad, this has always been the workflow. > > This made sense with CVS where it's hard to develop otherwise. With git > anyone can keep on development in a personal tree. There are no > advantages to pushing unreviewed changes that I can see.
The review is never complete and it does not catch all bugs. At some point it's better to push the patches to a tree where they are getting some testing. Currently only the master tree, stable trees and Anthony's tree get some attention from testers. >> > 2. When a change is committed to the tree, often no notification is sent >> > to the author. >> > Why is it a good idea to ask everyone to subscribe to qemu commits >> > list as well? Can 'applied thanks' mail be sent to patch authors? >> >> In the good old times, CVS commit messages went also to qemu-devel >> list. That may no longer be technically possible or even desirable >> because of the volume. I think qemu-commits sends the message to the >> qemu-commits list and the author, so the 'applied, thanks' shouldn't >> be needed if the list worked reliably. > > This does not work and never did. mail can also be sent earlier than > patch it pushed to a common tree: once someone else starts tracking > patch in his tree, controbutor can stop tracking it. In that model (Linux) we'd need a set of official second level trees with maintainers who also test the patches heavily. Unlike Linux, we don't have an unlimited supply of developers capable of acting as a second level maintainer. Also QEMU does not have many independent subsystems that could be delegated to the lieutenants.
