From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F48E138247 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:57:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 99DFEE0BFE; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:57:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f45.google.com (mail-wg0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF2C1E0BA5 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:57:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f45.google.com with SMTP id n12so3578841wgh.24 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:57:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=cyT4B7Mn/lwwP5A3+eAOLACMcBF6I8ZqapaRWfG5i0s=; b=ktOPhUKdbJe4gcIw9gv5iJ/PHtLnDsPqB6EDsMGDy67SHc6aZNPoKRu+rW1mOt4Vy/ diZ3lUCH5rQHZyLnqnqEX4eiKfYcVdXR/7gh1OwuPhSR0kUPSjcgomJbJaUAV3lU+aXI xAsotkgEMdd1PQydaj34Vc82qyMz/ZklSlxQZLP47WyDlmZTEM58rE83hWkooJi03y++ M32/x2A8PwkAThj8Anhg9gXKwIrBykLdIpUmyd6AsMa0R+NKmJAs7wV9UDYUr+WYX05W Q1QdeVrDnhHhlen4qx8q9CD49hjz+eUCzKkunBuRuldkbwHBN+heDQZqJb5emcmtz09r nT7w== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.106.165 with SMTP id gv5mr9303209wib.32.1389895064417; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:57:44 -0800 (PST) Sender: neurogeekster@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.83.206 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:57:44 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52D81A99.7050703@plaimi.net> References: <52D7DC9B.6050602@plaimi.net> <52D81A99.7050703@plaimi.net> Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 12:57:44 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: JsIQ0UXzaXLWS7EKzZqy06i-ixk Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Signing off patches From: "Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek)" To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f3bad4797687704f01a295b X-Archives-Salt: 2f6785f1-37d4-4db8-aba1-66330d2389ec X-Archives-Hash: 3e2610b899dd63c0669cc1331813a32c --e89a8f3bad4797687704f01a295b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 16/01/14 18:24, Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) wrote: > > So, how would this work with emails to this list, exactly? An > > email should be sent any time one of those fields is changed? > That's not necessary, in my opinion. We already send emails, "looks OK > to me" and similar. And most patches don't really need more than one > review and an ACK by the lead. > > > Do you have a more detailed plan on how would this work? > Not really. We're small enough to do this organically and on a > per-case basis. > > But basically, if someone authors a non-trivial patch, that person > should *never* push themselves. Whoever reviews it should push it, > adding the Reviewed-by field. The reviewer should also get an ACK by > the team lead (via IRC or whatever) and add that to the commit before > pushing. > Gotcha!, that makes sense to me. > > In a bigger project (or with a team lead with a lot of free time...), > I would argue that the reviewer should send the new commit, with the > Reviewed-by field added, to the team lead, which then adds the > Acked-by field themselves, before pushing. I'm not convinced the > benefits of this extra step outweighs the drawback in the overhead of > this small community of ours. > > - -- > Alexander > alexander@plaimi.net > http://plaimi.net/~alexander > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iF4EAREIAAYFAlLYGpkACgkQRtClrXBQc7WA4AEAmghIHMkNxiqJ79CONZzs/k/u > t0QoASddzlSruejiVaQA+QFOdbgMaA59hf9DInPAgpG7Kc6fbFENgkZn4jEY9NAq > =CrCK > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Thanks, -- Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) Gentoo Developer --e89a8f3bad4797687704f01a295b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Alexander Berntsen <alexander= @plaimi.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESS= AGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 16/01/14 18:24, Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) wrote:<= br> > So, how would this work with emails to this list, exactly? An
> email should be sent any time one of those fields is changed?
That's not necessary, in my opinion. We already send emails, &quo= t;looks OK
to me" and similar. And most patches don't really need more than o= ne
review and an ACK by the lead.

> Do you have a more detailed plan on how would this work?
Not really. We're small enough to do this organically and on a per-case basis.

But basically, if someone authors a non-trivial patch, that person
should *never* push themselves. Whoever reviews it should push it,
adding the Reviewed-by field. The reviewer should also get an ACK by
the team lead (via IRC or whatever) and add that to the commit before
pushing.

Gotcha!, that makes sense to m= e.=A0

In a bigger project (or with a team lead with a lot of free time...),
I would argue that the reviewer should send the new commit, with the
Reviewed-by field added, to the team lead, which then adds the
Acked-by field themselves, before pushing. I'm not convinced the
benefits of this extra step outweighs the drawback in the overhead of
this small community of ours.

- --
Alexander
alexander@plaimi.net
http://plaimi.ne= t/~alexander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlLYGpkACgkQRtClrXBQc7WA4AEAmghIHMkNxiqJ79CONZzs/k/u
t0QoASddzlSruejiVaQA+QFOdbgMaA59hf9DInPAgpG7Kc6fbFENgkZn4jEY9NAq
=3DCrCK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Thanks,

--
Jesus= Rivero (Neurogeek)
Gentoo Developer
--e89a8f3bad4797687704f01a295b--