From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1O60Wf-0004jm-6C for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:01:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 084B8E093B; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:01:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.221.179]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EF85E04C8 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:01:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so15680367qyk.1 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 05:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.242.3 with SMTP id lg3mr2864226qcb.102.1272196878061; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 05:01:18 -0700 (PDT) Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.229.250.12 with HTTP; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 05:01:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100425053625.6a72ee87@gentoo.org> References: <4BD32D26.5090005@gentoo.org> <20100425040601.5dc8e5d7@gentoo.org> <4BD4153F.5000509@gentoo.org> <20100425053625.6a72ee87@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 05:01:17 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0e38cc9be845a3e8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Requiring two sets of eyes for all eclass commits From: Alec Warner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: be602c70-8ed8-419e-a061-9c5b74762d72 X-Archives-Hash: 745b6bbef3fbcd7172c8fdcbd3fecca9 On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:11:11 +0300 > Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: > >> On 04/25/2010 01:06 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: > >> > I think it's a good idea to strongly encourage it, but actually forcin= g it >> > through cvs? =C2=A0No thanks. =C2=A0I'm not tracking down another dev = just to fix a >> > spelling mistake. :P >> >> How did the spelling mistake get there in the first place? A review >> system should reduce having them in the first place. > > People make mistakes. =C2=A0Anyways my point is that requiring a peer rev= iew for > trivial changes is just unneeded bureaucracy. =C2=A0Even for non-trivial = changes, > it doesn't make sense to force someone who knows their eclass inside out = and > knows what they're doing to get a review from someone else who may not ha= ve a > clue. =C2=A0I'm not saying that peer-review shouldn't be done; it's a ver= y good > idea, especially if you're new, or unsure of your changes, or you have a = team > consisting of more than one person. =C2=A0In fact I would support a polic= y that > said eclasses need to be reviewed before committing. =C2=A0But enforcing = it through > cvs is never going to fly. =C2=A0Just use common sense. Sure it will; you just need to create the tools with flexibility in mind. For instance: 1) Require peer review on all eclasses 2) Do not require peer review for changes less than N lines 3) enable a commiter to over-ride the review with some kind of option (--force or similar) 4) enable an eclass-owner to opt-out of the review process entirely with some kind of flag. I am not aware of how robust the pre-commit hooks in cvs are so I cannot comment on how easy these things are to implement. -A > > If we were having ongoing issues with people breaking eclasses then I cou= ld > see where you're coming from. =C2=A0But as it is, it's a non-problem. > > > -- > fonts, =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0by design, by neglect > gcc-porting, =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0for a fact or just for effect > wxwidgets @ gentoo =C2=A0 =C2=A0 EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 = F9A4 0662 >