[kde-community] Bikeshedding - our strength apparently *sigh*

Martin Graesslin mgraesslin at kde.org
Sat Sep 19 15:53:17 UTC 2015

On Saturday, September 19, 2015 5:46:07 PM CEST Kevin Krammer wrote:
> On Saturday, 2015-09-19, 17:36:09, Martin Graesslin wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 19, 2015 5:19:16 PM CEST Riccardo Iaconelli wrote:
> > > I think there was some confusion on that point, so let me state this
> > > again:
> > > the agreement is that github mirrors ARE going to be kept read-only, so
> > > someone with a KDE account and the developer karma still has to push the
> > > patch to git.kde.org (or reviewboard or so on...), if he wants to see it
> > > integrated. I don't see how that destroys our values. I just see it as a
> > > way through which potential newcomers can submit their first
> > > contribution,
> > > instead of mailing a patch.
> > > 
> > > At least, in my view, the mirrors will STILL be *READ-ONLY*.
> > 
> > I disagree. What I write now I mean for anything hosted under KDE/* and
> > not
> > e.g. mgraesslin/*
> > 
> > If we have some projects accepting pull requests it creates pressure for
> > other projects to also accept pull requests. This means my
> > identity.kde.org
> > account is no longer enough to maintain a KDE project.
> This is the concern I understand.
> Some projects accepting such requests (whatever that means, still unclear on
> that) could easily create the expectation that all projects do.
> > Pullrequests in the github are more than a way to submit a patch. It's
> > also
> > code review. At the point where this would happen, part of the community
> > is
> > excluded from participating in the code review process. Even more part of
> > our code actually moves to github. Previous versions of the patch are then
> > only available through github infrastructure.
> I am not quite sure I understand this concern.
> The patch would still go through review at KDE. Even with no github at all a
> patch could have been through several revisions before being submitted. The
> review always deals with the "final" submission (obviously not final if
> things need to be changed).

KDE does not have mandatory code review. I have to admit that I as a 
maintainer have quite often pushed commits directly which went to me by mail 
because I then reviewed them before pushing. Why uploading just to press 

My fear here is that if we allow pull request, people will also start to use 
them for code review at which point we have split the development team in 
those doing code review through reviewboard and those through github.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20150919/4ab13606/attachment.sig>

More information about the kde-community mailing list