[ovirt-devel] Why do we recommend to send a patch initially as draft?

[Eyal Edri]

On Sep 19, 2017 01:22, "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme at redhat.com> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Roy Golan <rgolan at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 at 22:30 Yaniv Kaul <ykaul at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Here[1]:
>> "Anyone can send a patch
>>
>
That's no longer true. We have a whitelist. [2][3]


Small correction, anyone can send a patch, only people from the whitelist
can trigger CI jobs on it, for reasons discussed before, mostly security
related.



> Initially a patch should be sent as draft"
>>
>
I think we should edit that to be more along the lines of "consider
initially posting as a draft" with guidelines to assist the decision.


> A draft is hidden from the public, why is it better to send as such?
>>
>
I've sent draft patches for 2 reasons.
1. I made progress on something and want to preserve it, but it's so WIP
that I wouldn't want anyone to see it. That might be because it could
confuse people, or it might be that the code is a prototype and/or so
terrible that I'd be embarrassed if anyone saw it :D Lately I'm more likely
to 'git format-patch | gdrive upload -' if it's something in this category.
2. I don't want to waste CI resources on something. Sometimes related to 1.


> I see few advantages and they all drawn from the assumption the initial
> patchset is always some sort of work in progress in really most of the
> cases:
> 1. It doesn't invoke automation and waste resources. First the developer
> should run it and be passed the checkstyle/pep/other errors locally.
> 2. Default reviewers feature hopefully will put the reviewers in place
> automatically so it not hidden.
>

Hmm, I believe the "hopefully" doesn't work. A few weeks ago I got a
notification that I had a draft to look at [because I was a default
reviewer], but when I followed the link, I received a "not found" error.

Best wishes,
Greg

[2] http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/2017-February/029633.html
[3] https://ovirt-jira.atlassian.net/browse/OVIRT-1154


> 3. After the patch is bit more mature it is worth publishing to get more
> reviews. Half baked or controversial patches may be costly to review. After
> they are published the reviewer can expect higher quality and can estimate
> better the effort in review
>
> IMHO we don't use this practice enough.
>
> TIA,
>> Y.
>>
>> [1] https://www.ovirt.org/develop/dev-process/working-with-gerrit/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>



_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel at ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20170919/d8c1bf36/attachment.html>