[Scummvm-devel] Changes in the ScummVM Team and PR approval process

Arnaud Boutonné strangerke at scummvm.org
Thu Jul 14 15:32:52 CEST 2016


Hi Eugene

Thanks for this detailed mail about the changes, it's clarifying a lot of
things.
I hope we'll still have some good code reviews as we had until now :)

I'm impatient to see the next engine PR to see how it's applied!

Thanks to you and wjp (and LordHoto, but he won't read this mail I guess)
for your work on the Core Team

Best regards,
Arnaud



On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Eugene Sandulenko <sev at scummvm.org> wrote:

> Hi Team,
>
> I had a nice chat with wjp over a beer, and we were discussing how we may
> proceed with ScummVM project since LordHoto left.
>
> There are going to be several separate e-mails on the process, so we have
> enough room for discussion. I am looking for your thoughts and obviously
> seeking support.
>
> So, after almost 5 years of existence of the Core Team, I am declaring it
> as officially disbanded.
>
> In the past, we had the Core Team involved mostly in the OSystem
> development and architecture, and now that role comes back to the
> individual developers.
>
> That means that there is also an adjustment to the PR approval. Now the
> (slightly modified) procedure will be as follows:
>
>    1. For a sizeable, significant changes it is advised to make a Pull
>    Request on the GitHub
>    2. Such Pull Request will have to stay for at least 2 weeks open for
>    the comments
>    3. Everyone is invited to comment and review and voice their opinion
>    (views of non-team members are valuable, but have no decisive power)
>    4. If there are no unaddressed objections after 2 weeks, the PR could
>    be merged. Exception could be made if there are suggestions over
>    refactoring or tidying up the code, granted that they will be addressed
>    in-tree
>    5. Immediately after the merge the PR maker ensures that
>    the buildbot stays happy and is not worsened (historically we had few ports
>    broken for months).
>
> Now on the sizeable changes. First of all, this is up to the discretion of
> the PR creator, but normally I expect that anything which breaks existing
> the OSystem API and the Common code, or significantly extends these,
> especially if it requires more work from the Porters, should go via a Pull
> Request process. The goal is to ensure that everything stays maintainable.
>
> Any developer is free to open the PRs for less significant changes, and
> that process could be used very well for facilitating discussion and
> collecting feedback, but when there are no big changes involved, no 2 weeks
> timeout is enforced.
>
> Individual engine sub-teams decide by themselves on the process. As I am
> aware, currently the SCI development is performed via PRs as well for any
> sizeable changes. It is up to that sub-team to drop this rule any time or
> make something even stricter. Just make sure you continue enjoying hacking
> on the ScummVM.
>
> That sums up this change on the Core Team.
>
>
> Eugene Sandulenko
> ScummVM Team Lead
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and
> traffic
> patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols
> are
> consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
> J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
> planning
> reports.http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Scummvm-devel mailing list
> Scummvm-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scummvm-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.scummvm.org/pipermail/scummvm-devel/attachments/20160714/a4919069/attachment.html>


More information about the Scummvm-devel mailing list