I'd like gitlab macros :rb: and :ab: that put the tags into the comment. Marek
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 5:01 PM Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 3:56 PM apinheiro <apinhe...@igalia.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 12/10/21 13:55, Alyssa Rosenzweig wrote: > > > > I would love to see this be the process across Mesa. We already don't > > rewrite commit messages for freedreno and i915g, and I only have to do > > the rebase (busy-)work for my projects in other areas of the tree. > > > > Likewise for Panfrost. At least, I don't do the rewriting. Some Panfrost > > devs do, which I'm fine with. But it's not a requirement to merging. > > > > The arguments about "who can help support this years from now?" are moot > > at our scale... the team is small enough that the name on the reviewer > > is likely the code owner / maintainer, and patches regularly go in > > unreviewed for lack of review bandwidth. > > > > There is another reason to the Rb tag, that is to measure the quantity > > of patch review people do. > > > > This was well summarized some years ago by Matt Turner, as it was > > minimized (even suggested to be removed) on a different thread: > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2019-January/213586.html > > > > I was part of the Intel team when people started doing this r-b > > counting. I believe that it was being done due to Intel management's > > failure to understand who was doing the work on the team and credit > > them appropriately, and also to encourage those doing less to step up. > > > > > > That's basically the same problem with trying to measure and compare > developers just by commit count. In theory commit count is a bad measure > for that. In practice it is used somehow. > > > > Unfortunately, the problem with Intel management wasn't a lack of > > available information, and I didn't see publishing the counts change > > reviews either. > > > > 💯 > > > > Upstream should do what's best for upstream, not for Intel's "unique" > > management. > > > > > > Not sure how from Emma explaining how Rb tags were used by Intel > management it came the conclusion that it were used in that way only by > Intel management. Spoiler: it is not. > > > > Replying both, that's is one of the reasons I pointed original Matt > Turner email. He never mentioned explicitly Intel management, neither > pointed this as an accurate measure of the use. Quoting: > > > > "The number of R-b tags is not a 100% accurate picture of the > > situation, but it gives at least a good overview of who is doing the > > tedious work of patch review. " > > > > In any case, just to be clear here: Im not saying that the Rb tags main > use is this one. Just saying that is one of their uses, and the value for > such use can be debatable, but it is not zero. > > <snark>Negative numbers aren't zero!</snark> > > --Jason >
