[U-Boot] u-boot gerrit server

[Vadim Bendebury (вб)]

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
<albert.u.boot at aribaud.net> wrote:
> Hi Vadim,
>
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 08:33:46 -0800, Vadim Bendebury (вб)
> <vbendeb at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Albert ARIBAUD
>> <albert.u.boot at aribaud.net> wrote:
>> > Hi Vadim,
>> >
>> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 21:21:27 -0800, Vadim Bendebury (вб)
>> > <vbendeb at google.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> For the purposes of this demo the patches submitted for review were
>> >> generated  by a script I wrote. The script scrapes
>> >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/, downloads the patches
>> >> from there and tries applying them. Not all patches apply cleanly (as
>> >> some of them are for branches).
>> >
>> > How do we intend to handle this? Will we move to a single
>> > repository, with each patch getting reviewers assigned based on
>> > which parts of the code it touches? Or move from repos to branches,
>> > one per current custodian repo? Or something else yet?
>> >
>>
>> Hi Albert,
>>
>> I *think* the way to go is to create multiple projects, one per
>> custodian, such that the upload URLs are different.
>>
>> >> If the patch applies cleanly, the script adds two stanzas to the patch
>> >
>> >>
>> >> - Change-Id: generated by git
>> >> - Patch-At: a reference to the patchwork page where the patch was
>> >> downloaded from
>> >
>> > 'Patch-At' seem ininformative to me. Why not 'Patchwork-URL'?
>>
>> It should not be there at all, scraping the patchwork is just a means
>> of seeding the server with patches to show how this looks.
>>
>> In the proper use case each user will puth their patches to the
>> server, so there is no need in the cross reference to patchwork.
>> >
>> >> and uploads the patch for review as the user named 'Gerrit Tester'.
>> >> Each upload creates a new git branch just for review purposes.
>> >
>> > (I'm skipping the gerrit workflow description here as I have
>> > used gerrit extensively in my, ahem, previous job)
>> >
>> > I'm fine with using gerrit and yes, it can be a useful tool, not only
>> > regarding review, but also for learning the whys and hows of code
>> > changes through the comments from both reviewers and submitters
>> > (and I am in strong favor of a policy that every reviewer comment
>> > must be addressed by a supmitter reply, even the default will-do one.
>> >
>>
>> exactly, this is the main advantage IMO also, keeping track of changes
>> and comments becomes so much more robust.
>>
>> Also, gerrit allows to see diffs between patches, this is what email
>> based review system can not easily deliver.
>>
>> > One drawback though: I cannot seem to be able to use my U-Boot mail
>> > address, even though it is a secondary address of my G+ account;
>> > gerrit only wants to see my gmail address. I sure hope that I am not
>> > required to use a gmail address to identify myself as the author
>> > of my own patches within the U-Boot project.
>> >
>>
>> This should not be the case, but there are some kinks with multiple
>> accounts. Can you try opening an 'incognito' window and sign up
>> through it?
>
> I did try anyway, but it did nothing, and that was quite predictable,
> and here's why: I didn't mean gerrit got mixed up between two of my
> Google+ accounts, as I only have one account, and can thus only log in
> with this one. But This account's main address i a gmail one, and my
> so-to-speak "U-Boot e-mail address", which I use for the ML, and in
> 'Copyright' lines in the U-Boot code base, and on Patchwork) is a
> secondary address of my Google+ account. And gerrit does not know of my
> secondary addresses, which make it unable to recognize me, once logged
> in, as the submitter of patches posted under my "U-Boot" address.
>

Moving everybody to bcc so that we could sort this out without
disturbing the rest.


Have you tried creating a new account from the incognito window? You
should be able to create an account with any arbitrary email.

--v



>> --vb
>
> Amicalement,
> --
> Albert.