Open Stack

On 6/27/12 8:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 03:24:21PM +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> It'd be really great if we could first improve Gerrit to handle the
>> patch series workflow in a better way. Without such a change, pushing
>> patch series to Gerrit is really no fun for anyone :/
>>
>>
> Yep, no argument that Gerrit could do with some improvements, but having
> submitted a number of non-trivial patch series to Nova, I don't think
> current Gerrit UI is a complete blocker to adoption. It is not ideal,
> but it isn't too painful if you're aware of what to look for. I think
> the main problem is that since the patch dependancies are not obvious
> in the UI, reviewers tend to miss the fact that they're reviewing a
> patch that's part of a series.
>
I agree that patchsets are better than monolithic patches.  Today, 
though, I am working on a 3-patch set and the process is driving me crazy.

a)  Any time Jenkins has a hiccup, I have to resubmit the entire 
patchset.  This obscures any reviews or votes that might be attached to 
other patches in the set.

b) Similarly, any time I change a single patch in the set, I have to 
resubmit the whole set, which causes review history to be obscured, even 
for those patches which have not changed at all.

Case b) would be entirely solved via a fix to  this: 
http://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=71.  That would also 
help with a) but not resolve it entirely... the best solution to a) 
would be a 'retrigger' button in Jenkins or a 'prompt Jenkins to 
re-review' button in Gerrit.  The fact that people (including me) are 
submitting trivial edits to patches only in order to nudge Jenkins is 
pretty stupid.

-A