Using Gerrit for code review in KDE

Milian Wolff mail at
Sat Sep 13 21:45:41 BST 2014

On Sunday 14 September 2014 08:11:43 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Ivan Čukić <ivan.cukic at> wrote:
> >> 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)
> Shouldn't this be up to the reviewer to use their good judgement when
> deciding whether to use +1 or +2?
> If they're not the maintainer or don't know the codebase well enough,
> then granting +2 would be rather unusual from a social point of view.

I agree here. Everyone with a KDE developer account should in principle have 
the right to give a +2. One should only use it when appropriate though, i.e. 
when one is the maintainer of a given piece of code or when the patch is 
simple enough so that one feels safe to give the other the ship-it. In 
ReviewBoard it's the same currently, no?

Milian Wolff
mail at

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list