[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] why restrict pull reqs to signed tags?

From: Peter Maydell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] why restrict pull reqs to signed tags?
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 19:42:57 +0700

On 9 March 2016 at 19:34, David Woodhouse <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-03-09 at 13:13 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> I understand, thank you. Especially your "directly commit to master"
>> analogy is good. Pulling replaces your detailed personal review with the
>> trusted identity of the pull requestor -- you trust that the commits on
>> the requestor's branch are already sufficiently reviewed.
> Note that it doesn't *have* to. And again, there's nothing special
> about email vs. pull requests here.
> Pater is saying that he *chooses* not to bother reviewing what he pulls
> in via pull requests, and *that's* why it's equivalent to direct commit
> access.
> I could just as well say that *I* choose to hold my nose and look the
> other way while running 'git am', and thus *patches* would be
> equivalent to direct commit access.
> I won't tell Peter that his behaviour is wrong. I'll only say that
> other projects don't have to do the same thing.

Yes; I'm describing QEMU's workflow, not trying to present it as
the One True Way of doing things. I would quibble with the
"not to bother" phrasing, though -- if I reviewed everything going
into master this would not scale and I would very quickly burn out
and go spend my time studying Japanese instead. The pullreqs-from-
submaintainers setup is specifically intended to spread that
review and test workload out to a wider circle of people (who
also have local-subject-area expertise which I don't have).
That I don't review the patches flowing into master via the
pulls I merge is a feature of this workflow, not a bug.

-- PMM

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]