Re: Patchwork patch tracking system

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>]

> > So if we try it and like it, how does one go about transitioning
> > from "trial" to "real"?
> 
> I guess by the people doing the reviewing deciding to use it.
> It may be it is useful even with only a subset of reviewers
> using it.  I can't determine this myself, I need feedback from
> people who are reviewing regularly.

In my opinion, the GDB project is in dire need of a way to track
patches. Using one's mailbox to track patches just does not work.
But I think that we would need full commitment to the tool from
the project, or else it'd quickly start overflowing with stale
info.

There is a tool that we use internally at AdaCore which I was starting
to think of proposing for GDB, called geritt. From what I have been
able to see from patchwork's webpage, geritt seems like a much more
advanced system compared to patchwork. But the tradeoff is that using
geritt requires a bit more work as well, and that part or all of
the review process would happen on geritt, rather than the mailing-list.
It's not very intuitive at first, but it is very easy and lightweight.

I personally believe geritt's approach to be better in the long run.
But, while I am worried about having communication and patch handling
be done via two distinct systems, patchwork's simpler approach might be
working well enough without requiring the big shift in patch-reviewing
paradigm.

-- 
Joel