Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
> The main point of my proposal is: let's make the *authors* who want
> their stuff to be reviewed as part of a commitfest do the extra work.
> There would be no extra work required for patch reviewers.
I agree with Heikki that for the process to be successful, it should
not impose extra work for the reviewers. The author is more motivated to
get his/her patch in than the review to review the patch. Besides, I
don't think it's too much to ask to have the author enter one line into
a wiki and keep the status up to date for the duration of the commitfest.
>
> Sure, we can refine that later. making it easier for patch authors as
> well, but I don't think it's an unreasonable amount of work to keep
> one line per patch up-to-date in a wiki. The line doesn't need to
> contain anything else than title of patch, name of the author, and
> links to latest patch and relevant discussion threads, if applicable.
> And commitfests are short, you only need to update the wiki a couple
> of times during the commitfest.
>
I think it's a good idea to try out the process with a wiki first, and
if it works well, consider a more sophisticated tool if needed.
How about use the following fields for the wiki page and have the author
be responsible for keeping it up to date?
Patch title
Patch URL
Discussion URL (optional)
Author
Reviewer (updated by reviewer or author)
Patch Status (awaiting review -> reviewing -> ... -> accepted |
rejected | whatever)
Regards,
-Robert