Using Gerrit for code review in KDE

[Ivan Čukić]

> that needs to be reverted because it's actively objectiona-
> ble. As Ivan pointed out, few of us will ever commit any-
> thing if we're not confident it would meet with the approval

While I do agree that we have a strange and unreally awesome community that 
behaves really well (and I do trust most KDE devs), I was approaching to this 
from the same angle as Martin.

Namely, for the projects that I know the people who are actually the /core/ 
team, I always wait their input before pushing something. For those that I 
don't know, I need to check who is in charge, and whether a 'ship it' I got 
actually has any weight behind it.

+2 would show a newcommer that the review is really by someone who (1) looked 
it in-detail, and (2) by someone who actually knows what he is talking about. 
(this might sound overly strict, but I guess you know what I meant by this)

For me, it is not about trust. But rather about providing additional 
information to the submitter. That is why I don't think that the requirement 
for the 'submit' does not need to be limitted to the maintainers/core team.

Also, Kevin's idea of +1s that got more weight over time (aka the inactive-
core-team mode) seems nice, though I don't think 1 week is the right ammount 
of time.

Cheerio,
Ivan

-- 
KDE, ivan.cukic at kde.org, http://ivan.fomentgroup.org/
gpg key id: 850B6F76, keyserver.pgp.com