Re: Patchwork patch tracking system

Eric Christopher <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gdb.devel
Message-ID <CALehDX6F9wMzSMF2iA-UdGnOTSxpj6uywbad84Uy=HmBnu88Gw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Joel Brobecker <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > So if we try it and like it, how does one go about transitioning
>> > from "trial" to "real"?
>>
>> I guess by the people doing the reviewing deciding to use it.
>> It may be it is useful even with only a subset of reviewers
>> using it.  I can't determine this myself, I need feedback from
>> people who are reviewing regularly.
>
> In my opinion, the GDB project is in dire need of a way to track
> patches. Using one's mailbox to track patches just does not work.
> But I think that we would need full commitment to the tool from
> the project, or else it'd quickly start overflowing with stale
> info.
>
> There is a tool that we use internally at AdaCore which I was starting
> to think of proposing for GDB, called geritt. From what I have been
> able to see from patchwork's webpage, geritt seems like a much more
> advanced system compared to patchwork. But the tradeoff is that using
> geritt requires a bit more work as well, and that part or all of
> the review process would happen on geritt, rather than the mailing-list.
> It's not very intuitive at first, but it is very easy and lightweight.
>
> I personally believe geritt's approach to be better in the long run.
> But, while I am worried about having communication and patch handling
> be done via two distinct systems, patchwork's simpler approach might be
> working well enough without requiring the big shift in patch-reviewing
> paradigm.
>

FWIW we (some of the google folk) looked at geritt for LLVM and
discarded in favor of phabricator. It seemed to solve a lot of the
problems that we had and allowed communication to and from the mailing
lists for patches which was key for us as we have a similar review
style to gcc/gdb/binutils. We didn't want to remove the ability for
people to send patches to the mailing lists, but yet get a better
review mechanism for large patches/queuing/etc.

Just piping in since we recently did some of this work. Feel free to
let me know if you have any questions on our experiences.

-eric
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.