On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:35:14 -0700 David Hendricks dhendrix@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Stefan Tauner < stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
I think it is a bit sad that almost all discussion in this thread is focused on the VCS to use and not about the guidelines. Apparently emotions regarding the tools are much more intense than about the created work.
Maybe it's a sign?
(Hint: re-read *all* the stuff you wrote, and then reconsider what Marc said about automation)
It certainly is a sign of frustration, but if I look at coreboot reviews I would even feel vindicated that the tools are not so important and one needs to set some rules, because frankly speaking... the coreboot review process has become pretty crappy lately AFAICS (but I am not that involved, maybe it was always like that). Things like Peter's patch that got merged although he did not want that and that he reverted afterwards etc. are a clear sign that there are some missing rules IMHO :)
And, even if we would switch to gerrit and git, I don't see how that would influence the guidelines I proposed very much. Yes, maybe there would be more reviewing and that would ease the problem of endless patch queues, but that would just be the same uncontrolled process - just faster.
So while I recognize the wish for changing tools, the pain would not go away just by switching them and we should discuss the process nevertheless :)