[Qt-creator] [Dev] Qt Creator Submit Policies

eike.ziller at nokia.com eike.ziller at nokia.com
Tue Nov 8 11:35:42 CET 2011

On 4 Nov 2011, at 20:57, ext Nicolas Arnaud-Cormos wrote:

> On Friday 04 November 2011 16:44:23 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>> On 11/04/11 08:32, ext eike.ziller at nokia.com wrote:
>>> I basically see these possible ways to create separate "branches":
>>> 1) A real git branch in gerrit's qt-creator/qt-creator
>>> That would be beside the master&  release branches. *Everyone* pulling Qt
>>> Creator automatically pulls these too, so I'd say they must be very
>>> limited. Or perhaps we shouldn't use them at all for "topic branches".
>>> If we do use them, we need some sort of policy *what* may be there, and
>>> I'd say a maintainer must agree.
>> what's wrong with everyone pulling the branches?
> Personnaly, that's the solution I prefer this one, as it allows more people to 
> discover the branch and maybe more people to contribute to it.
> If it's not the way to go, then the wip/clang branch should be moved.

Sure, wip/clang will be made to follow whatever we decide on.

> If it's the way to go, I agree that at least one maintainer must agree, and 
> the branch is deleted when merged (or the "maintainer" of the branch declares 
> it obsolete).
>>> 2) Gerrit project, qt-creator/*
>>> I suppose it would be possible to create separate (sub-)projects on
>>> gerrit, e.g. qt-creator/scriptplugin or something like that. Since these
>>> are really separate git repositories they don't affect people who pull
>>> qt-creator/qt-creator. Would be a bit similar to gitorious' repository
>>> clones. We should probably still have some sort of creation policy, and
>>> maybe also when they'll be removed again. But this could be handled with
>>> less restrictions than 1)
>> i don't want that. the gerrit gui is utterly unsuitable for managing it.
> Honestly, I'm not really fond of this one. Not talking about gerrit being 
> suitable or not, but:
> * you still need an admin to create the repository

> * your work is less visible

It wouldn't be visible when just doing "git branch -a", true.
There's a full list of repos in gerrit though,
that shows all qt-creator/* repositories, that can also have their own descriptions.

>>> 3) gitorious clone or clone whereever.
>>> Has the advantage of no restriction or policies, but the disadvantages of
>>> a) missing discoverability, and b) the "CLA requires you to use a
>>> feature branch on Gerrit" point above.
> I was going to do that (still early stage, didn't have more than 1h this week 
> to work on that). But I agree, the two issues given here are a problem.
> I would vote for #1, as long as only maintainer can create branch.
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
> -- 
> Nicolas Arnaud-Cormos | nicolas.arnaud-cormos at kdab.com | Senior Software 
> Engineer
> KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
> Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090
> KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions
> _______________________________________________
> Qt-creator mailing list
> Qt-creator at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator

Eike Ziller
Principal Software Engineer

Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks

Nokia gate5 GmbH
Firmensitz: Invalidenstr. 117, 10115 Berlin, Germany
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Berlin: HRB 106443 B
Umsatzsteueridentifikationsnummer: DE 812 845 193
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Halbherr, Karim Tähtivuori

More information about the Qt-creator mailing list