Hi Otavio, On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:07:41 -0200, Otavio Salvador <ota...@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Albert ARIBAUD > <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: > > Hi Otavio, > > > > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:16:15 -0200, Otavio Salvador > > <ota...@ossystems.com.br> wrote: > > > >> Hello Albert, > >> > >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Albert ARIBAUD > >> <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: > >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:00:06 -0200, Otavio Salvador > >> > <ota...@ossystems.com.br> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Vadim Bendebury (вб) > >> >> <vben...@google.com> wrote: > >> >> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Otavio Salvador > >> >> > <ota...@ossystems.com.br> wrote: > >> >> >> Besides, how people will 'transfer' one patch from one tree to > >> >> >> another? This will happen quite often as someone mistakenly sending a > >> >> >> patch for the wrong tree or custodians wanting the set to go together > >> >> >> in a single merge... > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > How is it handled today? Gerrit is after all just a means of keeping > >> >> > track of patches in a more efficient way, the rest could be similar to > >> >> > what is in use now, or enhanced using gerrit's features. > >> >> > >> >> Currently it is just reassigned in Patchwork; using multiple trees > >> >> will complicate this. > >> > > >> > How about one branch per custodian? At my previous job we had a couple > >> > branches, one per distinct "product". > >> > >> I am not aware of a way to 'transfer' a patch from one branch to another. > > > > There would not be such transfers -- we don't do this right now with > > our trees. We do merge requests, which means pulling two custodian repos > > into the same working repo, doing a merge between what are now two > > custodian branches, and pushing the result back onto one of the > > custodian trees. > > > > So here, if there is one branch per custodian, what we would need > > is the ability to merge one custodian branch into another. > > Right but currently you are not 'denied' to review a patch someone > didn't put for you. The custodians as done 'on-the-fly' as each > custodian takes his duties and process the patches and apply them, > later updating patchwork. IIRC, gerrit roles are orthogonal to branches, or can be made so at least, so custodians would not be barred from reviewing patches on other branches. The problem would be information: how does a custodian learn that a change set ( gerritspeak coming back :) ) on another branch requires his/her attention? > On the 'new Gerrit' workflow, if it is assigned for a branch/tree and > this is mistakenly done, how it will be done? If you're asking how we would make sure the patches go to the right branch... I have no idea. Amicalement, -- Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
