Daniel Vetter authored
There's a bunch of reasons why I think we should formalize and enforce our review rules for igt patches: - We have a lot of new engineers joining and review helps enormously with mentoring and learning. But right now only patches from contributors without commit rights are consistently subjected to review, which makes this imbalanced and removes senior contributors from the review pool. - We have a much bigger team and we need to make sure we're aligned on where igt as a tool and testsuite needs to head towards. Getting that alignment happens through reviewing each other's submission. Pushing a contentious patch and then dealing with a heated irc discussion is much less effective. - Finally igt becomes ever more important for our testing, making sure the code quality is high is important. Review helps with that. v2: Improve wording a bit (Imre). Acked-by: Daniel Stone <email@example.com> Acked-by: Jani Nikula <firstname.lastname@example.org> Acked-by: Joonas Lahtinen <email@example.com> Acked-by: Maarten Lankhorst <firstname.lastname@example.org> Acked-by: Petri Latvala <email@example.com> Acked-by: Imre Deak <firstname.lastname@example.org> Acked-by: Robert Foss <email@example.com> Acked-by: Ben Widawsky <firstname.lastname@example.org> Acked-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <email@example.com> Acked-by: Mika Kuoppala <firstname.lastname@example.org> Acked-by: Arkadiusz Hiler <email@example.com> Acked-by: Eric Anholt <firstname.lastname@example.org> Acked-by: Lionel Landwerlin <email@example.com> Acked-by: Lyude <firstname.lastname@example.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <email@example.com>c42ab4d2
After you've reviewed these contribution guidelines, you'll be all set to contribute to this project.