On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 01:13:37PM -0800, Vadim Bendebury (????) wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Tom Rini trini@ti.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 06:06:49PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Tom Rini trini@ti.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 03:14:13PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: [snip]
What I think it'd be possible to get working would be:
Custodians would have Submit rights Custodians would have +2 review rights "Normal" people would have +1 review rights CI system could have the +1 for verified Single tree
So essentially custodians could be assigned using some keyword, file matching and other clever heuristics, but it'd give freedom for them to 'drop' their review need or add someone else. Once they submit a change it goes straight to 'master' branch.
This easy the merging of stuff but this ends with the sub-trees.
This sounds like a first good step to me. It's important that things get reviewed and everyone seems to be able to see the difference between "this is a small change to $subsystem driver for $soc, $soc custodian can just push it" and "this is a big change, $subsystem custodian should speak up too". But I still want a final say on when things are able to be merged into master
In this case, you could be the only one with 'submit' rights. So everything would be just 'awaiting' for submit.
And custodian should still be able to easily pull together a list of stuff they're happy with, change sets I guess?
Presumably the custodians will have their own copy of their branch, they could upload patches to the master branch for merging into master.
Sorry for not being clear. I'm thinking of the single-tree approach where custodians don't have separate trees per-se but provide changesets they want merged or some other mechanism to include the N changes they're happy with and have reviewed.