Rekonq default

Eike Hein hein at
Sat Feb 20 21:43:33 GMT 2010

On 02/20/2010 07:50 PM, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> Why? Because the reviewers are not capable of using git? That's 
> ridiculous. We do not have to follow our established workflows 
> religiously if they do not make sense.

I'd certainly prefer it if we could avoid the detour
into SVN. But the contra argument you're sure to hear
is that the kdereview dir in SVN concentrates every-
thing that is up for review in one place, making it
easier for people to make code review part of their
regular routine. Basically it's less about the SCM
and more about the fact that the SVN dir listing
serves as index of things that are up for review.

One solution is to move the index elsewhere: We could
set up a page on Techbase where people looking for re-
view would have to add their apps, with links to the
source and the module they're looking to join. Review-
ers could even add their sign-offs there (or perhaps
we'd want to keep that on the mailing lists for high-
er fidelity).

The other thing with kdereview in SVN is that by its
very nature every KDE developer and thus every review-
wer has commit access there. Often you see people hel-
ping out with getting code into shape in the review
phase. If you want to retain this highly positive
effect on Gitorious, you have to straighten out the
repository permissions at the start of review, not
at the conclusion. That's also doable, of course. A
good first step would be to document how a repo needs
to be set up on Techbase; in practice I've been han-
ding out links to the mails I wrote to the Konversa-
tion mailing lists explaining the Amarok and Konver-
sation setup to the team so far, but they could use
some editing for a broader audience. Actually I think
jpwhiting had started on that ...

> Regards,
> Ingo

Best regards,
Eike Hein

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list