[libvirt] [RFC] Adopting 'Tested-by' tag (and probably other tags)?

[Kashyap Chamarthy]

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 01:40:33PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 08:14:31AM -0400, John Ferlan wrote:

[...] # Snip some useful discussion

> > What happens if one forgets or one consistently doesn't provide the
> > tags? Is their push privilege taken away? IOW, what's the penalty for
> > not following the accepted community rule?
> 
> > Again, I'm not against this, but sometimes getting *any* commit message
> > for a patch is a struggle for some! Adding tags could be torturous ;-)
> 
> Dealing with S-o-B is trivial, since it just means adding -s flag to
> git. The other tags are more manual, but not that much work.
> 
> The reviewed-by tags serve two purposes - one they give an indication to
> the subsystem maintainer that the code has a certain level of review and
> thus might be ready for merging, and two they give a historic record of
> who did what. In our model with much broader set of committers, I don't
> think the reviewed-by gives much benefit, so it just becomes a record of
> who did what - which is already something present in the mailing list.
> 
> Personally I'd just keep things simple and only require a S-o-B from the
> patch author, and the person committing. If people want to add other
> tags fine, but I certaily wouldn't enforce anything other than S-o-B

I concur with your view.  (I didn't imply that the specific tag
mentioned in my email Subject ought to be 'enforced'.)

---

Is there any hurdle from adopting the S-o-b approach that you outlined
above?  Or is it just that it involves getting a consensus-based
agreement among upstream contributors, and making the trivial adjustment
to the Git workflow like you indicated above, adding: '--signoff' flag
to `git commit`?  (I guess it's the latter.)

Thanks.

-- 
/kashyap