From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 209.132.183.28, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by groups.io with SMTP; Tue, 03 Sep 2019 10:45:44 -0700 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89DD9308212F; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-116-140.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.140]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27EDF19C78; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:45:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [edk2-devel] [RFC] EDK II Continuous Integration Phase 1 To: Sean Brogan , "rfc@edk2.groups.io" , "Ni, Ray" , "devel@edk2.groups.io" , "Gao, Liming" , "Kinney, Michael D" References: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E4E1317@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5C2BD07D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <8b35c38b-f914-42b6-e589-871ec92da713@redhat.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5C2BE925@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: "Laszlo Ersek" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 19:45:32 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.47]); Tue, 03 Sep 2019 17:45:43 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 09/03/19 19:09, Sean Brogan wrote: > Laszlo/Mike, > > The idea that the maintainer must create the PR is fighting the > optimized github PR flow. Github and PRs process is optimized for > letting everyone contribute from "their" fork while still protecting > and putting process in place for the "upstream". > > Why not use github to assign maintainers to each package or filepath > and then let contributors submit their own PR to edk2 after the > mailing list has approved. Then the PR has a policy that someone that > is the maintainer of all files changed must approve before the PR can > be completed (or you could even set it so that maintainer must > complete PR). This would have the benefit of less monotonous work > for the maintainers and on rejected PRs the contributor could easily > update their branch and resubmit their PR. I'll let Mike respond. Thanks Laszlo