From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63EEA1F4C1 for ; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 21:41:56 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=aLWMD flr8y9TwGQ3S44eBMDJ7f7gC5/vMFHqwKuGcmFveWObG19NBDvgPiyw7a23MaRpY YR2UbnLj/dJSzlye3apO4bUGdu+OEYnnEGqpf1CeTsu1lGvsOUOXqV3+2S7jQHZr NO0mkziyrisjxtrwb2EZdN+sT/3oHsV+ShrZL8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type; s=default; bh=oeqmq66YVHh ok4wHuGDWT/pj9dY=; b=Mou7PouWz6fb0dOopGxjqTIGSsrigg6f1o8EM4c896D oICuAjeoSl2brdcLIcnYGlvWTp/m9JSAOgiBPxCOSWIXlve+6TUNVkpBpT7+oUqA hdE352sco/AK8qJz78+S+6nZSUPreVgYxd37rCClPeAVJopPm2S1kULvPI5V8XZs = Received: (qmail 67025 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2019 21:41:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 67017 invoked by uid 89); 24 Oct 2019 21:41:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-HELO: esa2.mentor.iphmx.com IronPort-SDR: jVbL1senHOKVaeQC53BPspqPWaokEXpCp9pUoLOEtIukVMOePzogU5s6Dy84Nh0C37K86dGAV1 UiXa4m65FMvmXG/rJmefpqAbvcp7jZE9kffG2sbsg4bainHfXnvJUm5HIe8n0XOPJH8VzhNoaI kXkuxhkA+XbhnSfTl1bMQ2iLMNg/NwYvRkoNRtwux99Amu6s8GpC9uBuCzedCrgmXJgn2ooyg/ Npu4aCymk/0oIegFweICYP2HSuwr3DVq/zt8JTW9bHBR1JeiLoFjhzvVotn0FHf35DUo/lDKGY pj0= IronPort-SDR: lpZRh2TQL6G/UGHVmhsa/VRoNv31JKOjz970VbSP65urGXGhwquEcT0kiGiCwoXwSX8lZbrB49 NMwEEW1pXYbEswAhnhv70soCP5y0Q4HI3PVgxHA7UhjQCDassTzgfzIOZ7qZZsKIAJ6JaRYaI3 l/NO7UDA0GRK7lFWwnzs56OC644aCc6MF/WbKEZniPtxyq2xQl1r3+y+1HrgG2IcC3r56z5VGm cQs4SnodcL8qk47i8jy+2A5Z8n6ieNx8x7KavbfJBN7n0mMYx0TXQZFq0dn13RtQkPwQ4mXrGD haw= Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 21:41:43 +0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Carlos O'Donell CC: libc-alpha Subject: Re: Setup non-pushing gerrit instance for glibc. In-Reply-To: <2e93ece9-386b-c587-9355-33a4695a3f02@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <2e93ece9-386b-c587-9355-33a4695a3f02@redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" On Thu, 24 Oct 2019, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > * Try to setup email based code review in gerrit. > - Currently email is outbound only. Observations on teething troubles with the initial setup: 1. What's the status of fixing the problem with insufficient diff context in emails when comments relate to particular parts of the diff? They need to quote the relevant amount of context (typically at least the whole diff hunk, including the hunk header showing the changed function name) rather than just one line and a reference to an external URL. It's important for messages with reviews to be meaningful in themselves without depending on external links. This is a longstanding problem (it was obvious in some experiments some people did with proposing GCC patches with Rietveld, gerrit's predecessor, several years ago). Someone in the GDB discussions mentioned a prototype patch to add some context to the emails, so maybe we could use that patch. 2. Could text comments in emails from gerrit be properly wrapped? Messages such as are hard to read in the list archives because of very long lines. (Of course, diff context / quoted source lines should not be wrapped.) 3. Could we document (on the wiki, I suppose) the process for setting up git remotes if you want a git repository to get local copies of all versions of all changes proposed this way? My understanding is gerrit makes those available as refs named in some particular way, so adding a remote with appropriate fetch config should work, but the particular recipe ought to be documented. 4. Could we document how to get and keep up to date a complete local copy of all the glibc review data in gerrit (comments etc.) using whatever APIs are available? Again, I think the relevant APIs already exist, but how to use them for glibc ought to be documented (this is especially the case for a service like this that's experimental, and thus might go away in future). 5. It would also be useful to have documentation for how someone should make a patch series appear appropriately in gerrit if they want to propose a series that way. That means the emails for a patch series should include 1/N, 2/N etc. in their subjects (with a 0/N cover letter as appropriate). 6. Lower priority, but note there are certain kinds of changes involving huge diffs (e.g. to generated files) that thus *would* need a message size limit and pointing to a URL for the diffs in that case, for it to be possible to handle such changes through gerrit. (When sending email manually for such a change one can always omit the 50 MB of diffs to generated files, but as I understand it part of the point of such a patch review system is that the system seems the exact change proposed to be committed, complete with generated files, so enabling automated testing of patch proposals if desired.) -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com