On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 04:12:37PM +0000, Blue Swirl wrote: > On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > I'd like to discuss two questions related to changes that > > are committed to the shared tree. > > 1. A lot of patches are committed without being posted > > to the list first, thus they go in without review. > > Why is this good? Can this be addressed? > > Good or bad, this has always been the workflow.
This made sense with CVS where it's hard to develop otherwise. With git anyone can keep on development in a personal tree. There are no advantages to pushing unreviewed changes that I can see. > > 2. When a change is committed to the tree, often no notification is sent > > to the author. > > Why is it a good idea to ask everyone to subscribe to qemu commits > > list as well? Can 'applied thanks' mail be sent to patch authors? > > In the good old times, CVS commit messages went also to qemu-devel > list. That may no longer be technically possible or even desirable > because of the volume. I think qemu-commits sends the message to the > qemu-commits list and the author, so the 'applied, thanks' shouldn't > be needed if the list worked reliably. This does not work and never did. mail can also be sent earlier than patch it pushed to a common tree: once someone else starts tracking patch in his tree, controbutor can stop tracking it. -- MST
