Hi All, You do all realise that we are going about this, to use some British vernacular, arse-about-tit
Everyone agrees that the current U-Boot review workflow 'has issues' (and has had issues for quite some time). The first attempt at overcoming these issues was Patchwork. I personally think that that ended up being far less successful than we hoped Then Simon Glass wrote some truly excellent 'developer side' tools (patman and buildman) which I think we can all agree has help lighten the load be improving the quality of the patch submissions (not the patch code necessarily, but the submission process) And now we are looking at gerrit and, to be honest, we have one side of the fence trying to bang a square peg into a round hole, and on the other, the hole keeps changing shape. Implementing gerrit will force a significant change to the workflow of everyone involved in U-Boot (developers and maintainers). Question is - is the _workflow_ so broken that it needs such a drastic change, or does it just need a few more tools to 'grease the axle' so to speak. Or has U-Boot outgrown the current workflow model to such an extent that we need to change it? If the workflow is really that broken, then, unfortunately for some, there will be a rather painful transition to a new one. We've identified that there is a problem, but nobody has yet to qualify and quantify exactly what the problem is. You can't fix a rattle with a screwdriver if the problem is a loose nut :) Regards, Graeme
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
