Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Proposed Gerrit workflow (was: Re: Notes from Sharkfest '13)

[Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/22/13 06:47, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> 2013/6/21 Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA256
> >
> > On 06/20/2013 04:52 PM, Guy Harris wrote:
> > > On Jun 20, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 06/20/2013 02:17 PM, Gerald Combs wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Advantates: - I'm not sure that an in-house equivalent (e.g. Gerrit
> > > > > plus a private repository) would be better than what Github offers.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, Gerrit is better than github:
> > >
> > > Presumably you mean "Gerrit plus a private repository is better than
> > > github", as Gerrit, as far as I can tell, is just software that works with
> > > a Git repository.
> >
> > Yes, although managing repositories being what Gerrit do, Gerrit without a
> > least one repository would be a very boring application.
> :-)
>
> I have started describing a Gerrit based workflow which IMO would fit
> to the project at http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Workflow .
> Please check it and share your opinion.

It would probably be good to include how/where patch submitters would 
attach other attachments (e.g., sample captures) that go along with 
their patch (I spent a little time going through the Gerrit docs and 
didn't find anything like that).  (A large portion of the patches we 
accept need to have a corresponding test capture file before anyone will 
accept it.)