linux-kernel - public gerrit instance for kernel

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:28:29 +0100
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     workflows@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@...gle.com>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Nieder <jrn@...gle.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Subject: public gerrit instance for kernel

Hi,

We've setup a public Gerrit instance for use with Linux kernel development:
https://linux.googlesource.com/Documentation/#gerrit-code-reviews-for-the-linux-kernel

After one-time setup changes can be pushed with a single command:
$ git push gerrit-net HEAD:refs/for/master

Gerrit has several (subjective) benefits over email-based reviews:
 - full context (you can expand more context as necessary)
 - diffs between version, e.g. full change is +547 lines:
https://linux-review.googlesource.com/c/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux/+/2265/2
but diff between v1 and v2 is just 2 empty lines:
https://linux-review.googlesource.com/c/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux/+/2265/1..2
(no need to write that up, trust subjective write ups)
 - colored side-by-side diffs, e.g. here you can easily see that even
that line has changed it's only slash at the end that's added:
https://linux-review.googlesource.com/c/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux/+/2103/1/kunit/Makefile#2
 - marking files as "reviewed", always correct base tree/revision, etc

But note there is no "official" story for gerrit in the linux process.
You may use it as you find fit. Some uses that we found useful so far:
 - upload to do self-pre-review
 - review within a team of people who agree to use gerrit
 - include a link to gerrit into the upstream patch email as FYI
(after “---” line)
 - upload somebody else patch just to review with side-by-side diffs
and full context

The branches are mirrored automatically from kernel.org; you can
upload changes for review against those branches, but submission has
to be routed through the traditional process.

If you are brave enough, you may use a gerrit-managed tree as well,
then with ability to merge/edit change on the web, non-losing comment
threads attached to lines of code, change status tracking, etc. But
that will need to be setup separately.

There are some improvements planned like not requiring Change-ID and
proxying comments to/from kernel mailing lists. But that's only in
plans now.

Thanks