| #summary Procedure for Melange Code Review. |
| #labels Contents-Draft |
| |
| = Requirements = |
| |
| All commits and must be reviewed by at least one Melange engineer other than the author before migration to the master branch. |
| |
| = Exceptions = |
| |
| Commits made as part of the release process ("Set new Melange version number...") are exempt and may be made on master. |
| |
| = Author Process = |
| |
| When you feel that your current line of development is ready for review: |
| # If master has advanced beyond where it was when you started your development, pull the current head of master and merge master's changes with yours. |
| # Push your line of development to a branch in the origin repository. |
| # Ask another Melange engineer to review every unreviewed commit in your branch. |
| # Make changes and re-push to your branch, and secure re-review as necessary. |
| # When every commit on your branch has been reviewed (positively), push the (reviewed) head commit of your development branch to master, taking care to make no additional changes. |
| # Prune your development branch if it will see no further use. |
| |
| = Sample Author Commands = |
| |
| *TODO(nathaniel)* but the important one is {{{git push origin <commit hex string, not branch name>:master}}}, which will either push a specific reviewed commit to master or fail as non-fast-forward. |
| |
| = Rebase = |
| |
| *Do not rebase.* We lose review history and chronological ordering with rebases. Linear history just isn't worth it. |
| |
| = Reviewer Process = |
| If a change looks good and needs no comment, just mark it positive and hit the "submit" button. This suppresses the per-commit email thread and cuts down on mailing list noise. |
