CI system maintainability

Volker Krause vkrause at
Thu Mar 28 16:21:01 GMT 2019

On Thursday, 28 March 2019 16:11:12 CET Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 28. März 2019, 14:33:59 CET schrieb laurent Montel:
> > For example I works all days on kde (pim or other) when I wake up, or at
> > noon after my lunch or the evening, I will not wait several days for a
> > review because nobody has time to do it.
> > 
> > (For example I make ~ 15 commits by days on pim/ruqola/framework, I don't
> > want to wait several days/weeks until someone wants to review my patchs)
> Something might be lost in translation here, do you think, because you work
> daily on code of KDE projects, and other people (so potential reviewers) do
> not, this is an argument to do instant pushes of unreviewed commits?
> While I understand one can get impatient if not getting instant review of
> changes one would like to depend on with further changes (I know this well
> :) ), still this seems a flawed argument at least for
> part-time-contributors based KDE projects, where the people one co-operates
> with only have time now and then, like once per week. It could be seen
> unfair & ignorant to them if one simply ignores their opinion, because one
> has more time reserved/ available.

I don't think any of that was meant here. The scenario that Laurent has in 
mind I think, and that I'm facing too, is that putting up a few dozen patches 
a week in a single repository for review and then having to wait for the 
review timeout because there's nobody else working on it is not even remotely 
practical, let alone with the current toolset of arc/phab.

> Not sure where this is from, but often I have seen an unwritten policy
> applied where people for a patch uploaded for review after one week of no
> response add a ping and then wait another week, before finally pushing the
> change. To me this seems a fair and reasonable policy, only ignores people
> who are on vacation for some more weeks or otherwise inactive, but I have
> not seen that ever been a real issue.

This works fine if you have less than a handful of patches in a single repo, 
and people actually review things. And we make plenty of use of that:

In fact I was just criticized last weekend at the privacy sprint for sending 
too many reviews ;-)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list