> > Hi, > the community around the SPICE project always tried to follow one > fundamental, implicit rule for accepting code contributions to the > project: every merge request (beside trivial patches) should be reviewed > and acked at least by one before getting merged. > While everyone agrees with this fundamental rule, the actual status of > some SPICE projects makes the rule impractical to let the project move > forward. > Let's consider the spice/spice project as an example: the number of > contributions is very low, both on the commit side (only 4 different > contributors with more than 1 commit from the beginning of the year, and > a single contributor with 90% of commits) and on the review side (in the > last 40 merge requests before the C++ switch one, 21 had no comments). > The x11spice project is another example: we have only 4 contributors > from the beginning of the year (and a single contributor holding 70% of > the commits) and the reviews on the gitlab merge requests have been > provided by two people only, each one reviewing the merge requests of > the other. > For the sake of having the projects being able to move forward with a > reduced number of contributors/reviewers, the proposal is to *allow* a > maintainer to merge a Merge Request without an explicit ack if the three > following conditions are met: > 1) The Merge Request has been pending for at least 3 weeks without > getting new comments > 2) The Merge Request submitter has kept asking a review on a weekly basis > 3) There are no pending nacks on the Merge Request > > Note that having patches reviewed would still be the preferred way. If > at any time the number of contributors would raise again, we can switch > back to the mandatory review rule. Until then the priority is to allow > the project to move forward. > > What do you think? Please share your thoughts and/or contribute with > your own ideas. > > Thanks > > Francesco > Hi, I agree on the proposal. This problem has been going on for years now. The issue involve all repositories. The active part of community dealing with code review is very low. I think 3 weeks are perfectly fine. We should be in a trustful community, if somebody is very busy in daily activity or on holidays whomever remains should be in charge. Is not that is a person in a team goes on holiday all the work of the team is impeded. Frediano _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel