Re: Proposed Gerrit workflow (was: Re: Notes from Sharkfest '13)

[Bálint Réczey <balint () balintreczey hu>]

Hi,

2013/6/22 Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc () petit-huguenin org>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 06/22/2013 09:43 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> > Hi Marc,
> >
> > 2013/6/22 Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc () petit-huguenin org>:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
> > >
> > > On 06/22/2013 03:47 AM, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > 2013/6/21 Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc () petit-huguenin org>:
> > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
> > > > >
> > > > > On 06/20/2013 04:52 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
> > > > > > On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin
> > > > > > <marc () petit-huguenin org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 06/20/2013 02:17 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Advantates: - I'm not sure that an in-house equivalent (e.g.
> > > > > > > > Gerrit plus a private repository) would be better than what
> > > > > > > > Github offers.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, Gerrit is better than github:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Presumably you mean "Gerrit plus a private repository is better
> > > > > > than github", as Gerrit, as far as I can tell, is just software
> > > > > > that works with a Git repository.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, although managing repositories being what Gerrit do, Gerrit
> > > > > without a least one repository would be a very boring application.
> > > > :-)
> > > >
> > > > I have started describing a Gerrit based workflow which IMO would fit
> > > > to the project at http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Workflow .
> > > > Please check it and share your opinion.
> > >
> > > "Code is building and tests are passing on all platforms. (Tests
> > > automatically start when at least one Core Developer gives +1 or +2 to
> > > prevent overloading or cracking the build servers.)"
> > >
> > > Why do not build and test all patchsets submitted?  Is that a limitation
> > > of the build servers?  Having Jenkins automatically verify your patchset
> > > is IMO one of the nice feature of Gerrit, and it will lower the workload
> > > of core devs if building and testing are done before they start looking
> > > at the patchset.
> > Build can be triggered by patchset submissin, too, but it would require
> > more build server resources. Usually not the first version of the
> > changeset will be accepted especially from new contributors and this means
> > more builds.
>
> My view is the opposite: New contributors patchsets will probably be rejected
> anyway (does not build, does not pass test, etc...), so having the system
> doing that lowers the burden on core developers, who they can focus on more
> high level problems.
>
> > Note that Core Developers would not have to wait since they can give +1 for
> > their own changesets.
> >
> > The other reason behind requiring a +1 from someone we trust is that
> > otherwise it would be easy to prepare a changeset which does unspeakable
> > things to the build servers which we don't want to happen. Without
> > requiring +1 we would have to prepare build systems to cope with malicious
> > commits.
>
> That is a good point (basically because of the halting problem).  But builds
> are done in isolation (i.e a git clone is done each time), so apart using too
> much resources or never ending, there is no harm that can be done to the
> infrastructure.  And there is a Jenkins plugin to abort a build if it is stuck.
I was concerned about using the buildbots for attacking other systems, too,
but all of those threats can be handled and we have time for setting
up build bots
properly.

I have updated the proposal to start tests for every change and allow
Code Devs to
bypass peer review.

Comments are still welcome. :-)

Cheers,
Balint
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe