Gerrit and branches (Was: Re: libosmocore: patch for big-endian architectures)

This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.

A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.

Neels Hofmeyr nhofmeyr at sysmocom.de
Mon May 30 16:56:53 UTC 2016


On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 01:56:08PM +0200, Holger Freyther wrote:
> Can you elaborate? What are the goofy hacks?

Before it was just git, now gerrit has its tag on near everything I do with the
code. I wish gerrit were less visible:

- add gerrit remote
  - two upstream repos to sync to (origin and gerrit)
  - gitk shows every branch twice, once for each remote
  - checking out a new branch is more complex; because of two remotes, one
    needs to use the full 'git co -b <localname> --track <remote>/<name>'
    instead of just 'git co -b <name>'
  (I could probably work with just the gerrit remote, but then I wouldn't
  see what our public master repositories are up to)
- commit id. I can't just clone, I have to do extra cycles for each clone.
- access rules = obstructed access to branches = add 'users/' to all private branches
  = we have scores of old branches now in a namespace we can't use anymore
- elaborate command line args instead of simple pushes

Things just got so much more noisy on the git end.

> In fact reviewing has been more pleasant for me than before (besides the pain of having to wrangle with Java and doing a FreeBSD port of buck to build and debug it)

ok, that's a good thing.

My position + smiley means: I found it a hard process but it works the way it
is now; I'd have liked gerrit to be less visible in the daily workflows, but
whatever. If it's better for your reviewing, it's an improvement.

> For patch-series: Either way, sending a 40 patches en-block is not well received. This wouldn't be any better with git dump-email. ;)

It doesn't make much sense to split the IuPS dev into separate bits...
The branch makes sense as a whole. This is not a typical patch submission,
right?

Subdividing would be artificial, but ok, can do, if that helps reviewing.

> Besides the smiley I think you could have been more constructive, e.g you have admin rights and shell access to the system and I have already pointed you to the "Submit Type" in the project settings. Did you have a look at it to see if for your workflow we are using the wrong "type"?

I've spent enough time on gerrit overhead. Do I have to understand this? At
least I would prefer not to, to use my resources for the tasks "piling up on my
desk" instead.

> In osmo-sip-connector.git I changed from cherry-oick to always merge (probably fast-forward is closer to what we want in our change history) and pushed two changes. The last patch can be seen here https://gerrit.osmocom.org/#/c/127/1.

yes, that kind of makes sense, but how does this work. I go to the website,
reconfigure the project, submit my branch so it comes in as <type> and then
configure the project back to what it was? :P

What was your <type>, "always merge"?
Well, as I said, I hope I don't need to explore that right now...

Please confirm that I should/can just push the first handful of IuPS changes to
for/master.

~Neels

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/openbsc/attachments/20160530/d3c3a6c8/attachment.bin>


More information about the OpenBSC mailing list