[LLVMdev] code-owner sporks

David Peixotto dpeixott at codeaurora.org
Thu Nov 15 18:30:28 PST 2012

I think the main benefit of a scheme like this would be that a pull request
tells a code owner which patches require their attention. As a contributor
it would be nice to see your patch in a queue somewhere rather than just be
buried down the mailing list. When patches are sent to llvm-commits it can
be hard to tell if a code owner has noticed the patch because it is a very
high-volume list.


As a code owner I would think it would be nice to see a consolidated list of
the open patches for your area. I suppose it would also be nice to see which
commits have gone into your area and need a post-commit review.


-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted
by The Linux Foundation



From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On
Behalf Of Eric Christopher
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:48 PM
To: Greg Fitzgerald
Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu List
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] code-owner sporks




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.





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/20121115/337b00f4/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list