Re: [dpdk-dev] Suggestion to improve the code review

[Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>]

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 3:38 PM Gaëtan Rivet <grive@u256.net> wrote:
>
> On 27/05/20 09:28 +0000, Jerin Kollanukkaran wrote:
> > I think, original discussion[1] on this topic got lost in GitHub vs current workflow.
> >
> >
> > I would like to propose GitHub "CODEOWNERS"[2] _LIKE_ scheme for DPDK workflow.
> >
> > Current scheme:
> > - When we submit a patch to ml, someone(Tree maintainer[3]) needs to manually
> > delegate the patch to Tree maintainer in patchwork.
> > - Tree maintainer is not responsible for the review of the patch but only responsible
> > for merging _after_ the review. That brings the obvious question on review responsibility.
> >
> >
> > Proposed scheme:
> > - In order to improve review ownership, IMO, it is better the CI tools delegate
> > the patch to the actual maintainer(who is responsible for specific code in MAINTAINERS file)
> > - I believe, it provides a sense of ownership, avoids last-minute surprise on
> > review responsibility and improve review traceability.
> >
> > Implementation of the proposed scheme:
> > GitHub provides a bot for CODEOWNERS integration, Similar alternative is possible with
> > patchwork with "auto delegation scheme" using the flowing methods:
> >
> > a) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/delegation/
> > b) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/headers/
> >
> > I think, option (a) would be relatively easy to change without introducing the new tools.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > [1]
> > http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-May/168740.html
> > [2]
> > https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/blob/master/CODEOWNERS
> > [3]
> > https://patchwork.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> +1 from me. People would be able to list current assigned tasks through
> pwclient. It would help reviews IMO.

So far no objection to this proposal. Any other thoughts from anyone?
especially from the code maintainers.

Thomas, Any input as patchwork maintainer. This would boil down to the
following change in patchwork.

1) Add code maintainers are maintainers in patchwork.
2) Enable existing auto delegation[1] feature of Patchwork
[1]
a) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/delegation/
b) https://patchwork.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage/headers/

The suggested process is:
# When a patch gets submitted to ml, patchwork finds the code owner
based on the MAINTAINER file using the auto delegation feature.
# The code maintainer will be responsible for the "review" of that
patch and patch will be delegate will code owner using auto delegation
feature.
# If multiple code maintainers operate on the same patch, "each code
maintainer" can assign to "other code maintainer" once he is done with
the review.
# The existing review process will be followed as is, just that we are
adding code maintainer have primary review responsibility for the
patch and expressing in the patchwork.
# Based on the Ack's received and/or when code owner is happy with
changes, he/she can change the state  to "Awaiting upstream" and
assign to respective
tree maintainer.
# Finally, Tree maintainer will merge the patch to respective tree and
make the state as  "Accepted"