From patchwork Thu Dec 8 11:20:50 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Christopher Baines X-Patchwork-Id: 45122 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork@mira.cbaines.net Delivered-To: patchwork@mira.cbaines.net Received: by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix, from userid 113) id 4067A27BBEE; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:21:19 +0000 (GMT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on mira.cbaines.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 406E427BBE9 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:21:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3Exg-00016y-Kf; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 06:21:08 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3Exa-00016b-NY for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 06:21:02 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p3Exa-0006kY-E7 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 06:21:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3ExZ-0002r7-Qa for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 06:21:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#59513] [PATCH v2] doc: contributing: Tweak the Commit Policy. Resent-From: Christopher Baines Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2022 11:21:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 59513 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch moreinfo To: 59513@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 59513-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B59513.167049845710947 (code B ref 59513); Thu, 08 Dec 2022 11:21:01 +0000 Received: (at 59513) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Dec 2022 11:20:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56154 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3ExV-0002qU-9O for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 06:20:57 -0500 Received: from mira.cbaines.net ([212.71.252.8]:42034) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1p3ExQ-0002qL-VI for 59513@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2022 06:20:55 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2a02:8010:68c1:0:3a91:a0a4:ecee:f157]) by mira.cbaines.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D054927BBE9 for <59513@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:20:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (localhost [local]) by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 76755d5c for <59513@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:20:51 +0000 (UTC) From: Christopher Baines Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:20:50 +0000 Message-Id: <20221208112051.5019-1-mail@cbaines.net> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.38.1 In-Reply-To: <20221123104946.29480-1-mail@cbaines.net> References: <20221123104946.29480-1-mail@cbaines.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+patchwork=mira.cbaines.net@gnu.org Sender: guix-patches-bounces+patchwork=mira.cbaines.net@gnu.org X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: Patches Add more examples of when it can be appropriate to push changes without review, as I think this can be appropriate in the case of trivial changes (as mentioned before), but also non-trivial fixes. No longer suggest pushing simple new packages or package upgrades (that don't cause lots of rebuilds) without sending to guix-patches. Now there's some automation for testing changes sent to guix-patches, sending changes there before pushing can mean that more rigerious testing takes place and help speed up substitutes becoming available. This is true, even if no human review takes place. Only suggest waiting one week for review for simpler changes, wait two weeks for more significant changes. Also, reorder some of the information in this section so it's grouped together better. * doc/contributing.texi (Commit Policy): Tweak. --- doc/contributing.texi | 41 ++++++++++++++++++----------------------- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/contributing.texi b/doc/contributing.texi index 6a8ffd6524..d2e7abba98 100644 --- a/doc/contributing.texi +++ b/doc/contributing.texi @@ -1824,23 +1824,26 @@ It additionally calls @code{make check-channel-news} to be sure @subsection Commit Policy -If you get commit access, please make sure to follow -the policy below (discussions of the policy can take place on +If you get commit access, please make sure to follow the policy below +(discussions of the policy can take place on @email{guix-devel@@gnu.org}). -Non-trivial patches should always be posted to -@email{guix-patches@@gnu.org} (trivial patches include fixing typos, -etc.). This mailing list fills the patch-tracking database -(@pxref{Tracking Bugs and Patches}). - -For patches that just add a new package, and a simple one, it's OK to -commit, if you're confident (which means you successfully built it in a -chroot setup, and have done a reasonable copyright and license -auditing). Likewise for package upgrades, except upgrades that trigger -a lot of rebuilds (for example, upgrading GnuTLS or GLib). We have a -mailing list for commit notifications (@email{guix-commits@@gnu.org}), -so people can notice. Before pushing your changes, make sure to run -@code{git pull --rebase}. +Changes should be posted to @email{guix-patches@@gnu.org}. This mailing +list fills the patch-tracking database (@pxref{Tracking Bugs and +Patches}). It also allows patches to be picked up and tested by the +quality assurance tooling; the result of that testing eventually shows +up on the dashboard at +@indicateurl{https://qa.guix.gnu.org/issue/@var{number}}, where +@var{number} is the number assigned by the issue tracker. Leave time +for a review, without committing anything (@pxref{Submitting Patches}). +If you didn’t receive any reply after one week (two weeks for more +significant changes), and if you're confident, it's OK to commit. + +As an exception, some changes considered ``trivial'' or ``obvious'' may +be pushed directly. This includes changes to fix typos and reverting +commits that caused immediate problems. This is subject to being +adjusted, allowing individuals to commit directly on non-controversial +changes on parts they’re familiar with. When pushing a commit on behalf of somebody else, please add a @code{Signed-off-by} line at the end of the commit log message---e.g., @@ -1855,14 +1858,6 @@ right before pushing: make check-channel-news @end example -For anything else, please post to @email{guix-patches@@gnu.org} and -leave time for a review, without committing anything (@pxref{Submitting -Patches}). If you didn’t receive any reply after two weeks, and if -you're confident, it's OK to commit. - -That last part is subject to being adjusted, allowing individuals to commit -directly on non-controversial changes on parts they’re familiar with. - @subsection Addressing Issues Peer review (@pxref{Submitting Patches}) and tools such as