Re: FYI: Status of gdb usage of gerrit

[Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>]

On 11/27/19 2:52 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Carlos O'Donell:
> 
>> On 11/26/19 5:24 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>
>>>> * Joseph Myers:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't think we should require pushing through Gerrit.  For changes not 
>>>>> needing review it's an unnecessary complication; a normal git push ought 
>>>>> to be fine and Gerrit ought to be able to handle it.
>>>>
>>>> Jonathan Nieder's comments
>>>>
>>>>   <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-11/msg00532.html>
>>>>   <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-11/msg00533.html>
>>>>
>>>> suggest to me that whis would need custom Gerrit development (listed
>>>> as option 3, “something fancy with two-way sync”).
>>>
>>> No, just running Gerrit on sourceware - the first of those messages 
>>> explicitly says "It copes fine with the repository being updated behind 
>>> its back".  Running it on sourceware seems obviously the right thing to do 
>>> for non-experimental use.
>>  
>> Correct.
>>
>> For changes pushed "behind" gerrit you would have to add the "Reviewed-by"
>> lines and it would cause the gerrit review to be stuck in an intermediate
>> state requiring cleanup because the commit message changed without review.
>>
>> For changes pushed "with" gerrit it would work just fine.
>>
>> So my suggestion was:
>> * You review via gerrit and push in gerrit
>> or
>> * You review via email and push directly (no Changeset-Id).
> 
> I see.
> 
> I think this dual setup is too confusing.  People will ack patches on
> one side of the fence that have been vetoed on the other side.

Excellent point!

> Are we still seriously considering using Gerrit? Personally, my plan
> was to drain the patches currently in Gerrit and stop using it.
> 
> Should we try something else instead?

Yes.

I think we should try patchwork 2.0.

> I wonder if I should put some effort into teaching Gnus how to post
> patch series and import posted patch series into local branches.
> Someone else should do the same thing for mutt.  But I don't know how
> we can reach Thunderbird and webmail users.
> 
> The nice incremental diff review feature we've seen in Gerrit seems to
> have recently landed in Git itself, as git range-diff.  I haven't used
> it yet, admittedly.  However, I'm pretty much certain that better
> local mail client integration would give us many of the benefits that
> we've seen in Gerrit.


I'll try git range-diff!


-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.