On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, at 12:21, Matt Riedemann wrote:
I just wanted to highlight to people that there seems to be a series of
garbage patches in various projects  which are basically doing things
like fixing a single typo in a code comment, or very narrowly changing
http to https in links within docs.
Also +1ing ones own changes.
I've been trying to snuff these out in nova, but I see it's basically a
pattern widespread across several projects.
For what it's worth, I agree. A few days ago I gave a -1 and commented
on around 50 patches which were adding --- to the top of generally two
yaml files: one was a template the other was a test.
Another patchset removed a single space from the end of a line of a
After my comments they ware all abandoned.
Given the waste of resources, I can't help but wonder if we should be
re-visiting the way initial check gate is kicked off?
Should someone else have to do an initial +1? (Acknowledging that this
could be a colleague and other offender.)
Or could the gate be smarter about the types of changes (like checking
for one liners or changes to comments, etc)?
Or at least there should be a way for anyone to kill a review if it is
clearly a waste of resources?
Or detect patch bombing across projects.
Sadly people are going to abuse this, although probably generally out of
ignorance. However, how can we be a) smarter about the gate, and b) have
a big stick handy.
Perhaps when developers sign up to the CLA, this issue should be in big
bold writing and we can use that as a stick to disable people's access
to Gerrit? That should be a pretty big incentive to behave, it's hard to
do your job when your access has been removed (and only reinstated after
a specified process).
Anyway just some thoughts.