[LLVMdev] code-owner sporks

Eric Christopher echristo at gmail.com
Thu Nov 15 17:48:26 PST 2012

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote:

> Just brainstorming here, but what if each CODE_OWNER maintained a spork on
> Github and accepted Pull Requests?  What's a spork, you ask?  Well it's
> fork with no intent to diverge - it spoons some centralized repo (be it via
> git or git-svn).  If you haven't heard the term 'spork' in this context
> before, it's either because I just made it up or that we share the same
> incapacity to google effectively.
> As a contributor, my process would be to fork Github's llvm-mirror and
> make my patch locally.  Then I'd crawl up the directory tree from my code
> changes until I found a CODE_OWNER.TXT.  Worst case, I get to the root
> directory and spot a CODE_OWNER.TXT with a URI to the central repository.
>  All other CODE_OWNER.TXT files would contain a git URI pointing to the
> code owner's spork.  I'd make a Pull Request and hope for a review from the
> owner and/or anyone else monitoring that spork.  Once the owner accepts the
> Pull Request, it'd be between the members of the code-owner oligarchy how
> and when the patch is upstreamed to the central repository.
> Thoughts?
Doesn't sound useful for the code owners. Barrier to entry on submitting
patches to llvm or clang is almost never the version control scheme so I
don't see what the community gains either other than more complexity to

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121115/3c36e09b/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list