Last modified: 2013-04-26 11:17:55 UTC
<Nikerabbit> I want diffs like this: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#patch,all,26062,9
Upstream bug against Gerrit is https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=938 This seems to have stagnated last winter. The Qt people have implemented it, but they don't seem to have published the code yet; it sounds like they're wrangling the details of the Gerrit CLA (wouldn't be the first time, I know someone at another tech company who had to wait weeks for their legal department to examine the CLA before they let him upstream his Gerrit patches).
I've just poked a contact I have who does QT development (among other things) He's said he'll see if he can find out what's going on
[12:49:21] <w00t> 07/ 5@12:13:09 <#qt-platforms/w00t> ossi|tt: ok, so I can tell him "it's WIP - again"? [12:49:24] <w00t> 07/ 5@12:13:38 <#qt-platforms/ossi|tt> yes. it should be a matter of days, or even hours. it's policy stuff ... [12:49:30] <w00t> re: getting gerrit patches out in the open ^ fingers crossed
(In reply to comment #1) > Upstream bug against Gerrit is > https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/issues/detail?id=938 > > This seems to have stagnated last winter. The Qt people have implemented it, > but they don't seem to have published the code yet; it sounds like they're > wrangling the details of the Gerrit CLA (wouldn't be the first time, I know > someone at another tech company who had to wait weeks for their legal > department to examine the CLA before they let him upstream his Gerrit patches). https://qt.gitorious.org/qtqa/gerrit
Still valid.
Qt code is at https://qt.gitorious.org/qtqa/gerrit/commit/737400d1bad4fa8bfd39cb326636a0307014901f but somebody needs to get this into shape for upstream I assume, get it committed, and then we could backport. With regard to allocating Wikimedia Git/Gerrit development resources, I doubt that "high" priority here is correct.
(In reply to comment #6) > Qt code is at > https://qt.gitorious.org/qtqa/gerrit/commit/ > 737400d1bad4fa8bfd39cb326636a0307014901f > but somebody needs to get this into shape for upstream I assume, get it > committed, and then we could backport. > Well, I tried about 2 weeks ago. It doesn't merge and I didn't have the time to resolve the conflicts :) We wouldn't backport either--we'd wait until it went into master and build from that.
This is actually worse than I thought. The vast majority of the old RPC interfaces this patch makes use of have been deprecated/removed and replaced with new REST apis. This is going to take a long time to actually do, as it'll largely need to be rewritten.
Not high prio in Wikimedia - we'd rather wait for upstream providing this.
