| 1 |
On 04/24/2010 09:14 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 20:40:54 +0300 |
| 3 |
> Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> 17:34 < Betelgeuse> robbat2|na: how easy to it to prevent commits to |
| 6 |
>> CVS if the commit message doesn't match a certain pattern? |
| 7 |
>> 17:36 <@robbat2|na> go and checkout the CVSROOT and there should be an |
| 8 |
>> example there |
| 9 |
>> 17:37 < Betelgeuse> robbat2|na: Ok so doable then. Thanks. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> What do you think about not allowing commits to eclasses without |
| 12 |
>> mentioning an another developer who has reviewed and approved the diff |
| 13 |
>> in the commit message? There's enough people on gentoo-dev for urgent |
| 14 |
>> stuff too. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> no thanks; we already have the policy to require that major changes to |
| 17 |
> broad impact eclasses have gone through -dev, no need to add more |
| 18 |
> bureaucracy. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
But the policy is not tested by the quizzes and we have had cases lately |
| 22 |
where large diffs have been committed without gentoo-dev review. With |
| 23 |
peer review it's likely that the reviewer is familiar with what should |
| 24 |
be sent to gentoo-dev as hesitant/new people won't give their approval |
| 25 |
that easily. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
Petteri |
Archives