+1 from a Googler?

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

Hi,

I used to contribute a lot to Go, and back then, somebody would +2 a
patch, and then I would submit it and it was all very easy. I read
some blog post about how Google was locking down development a bit,
and I sort of lost interest and haven't submitted much in a long time.
But now I'm back at it, provisionally willing to at least see what
these new Google-centric hoops are like.

I've got a patch now here --
https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/615315 -- which is currently
+6, and has one Googler on it (and one ex-Googler). According to one
of the reviewers, in order to submit the patch, I now need another
Googler, and he suggested that I email golang-dev@ in order to find
such a Googler. So that's what I'm doing.

That feels slightly odd to me: do I really need to or want to spam
this list every time I'm looking to see a patch merged? More
importantly, do *you* really want to be spammed here every time I'm
looking to see a patch merged? So this feels like the wrong thing to
do. But that's what was suggested, so I'll give it a try. If this is
as much of a faux pas as I assume it is, though, please don't hesitate
to tell me to go away.

As a side note, I'd be willing to sign whatever document or submit to
whatever background check or sacrifice a goat or whatever would make
supply chain security people or lawyers happy so that I could have my
votes matter as much as Googlers' votes. If the current criteria of
being a Google employee is because those employees have been
appropriately vetted to not be supply chain pranksters, it'd be nice
if I could be vetted the same way too.

Thanks ahead of time for the +1.

Jason

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 1:46 AM Jason A. Donenfeld <Ja...@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> I've got a patch now here --
> https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/615315 -- which is currently
> +6, and has one Googler on it (and one ex-Googler). According to one
> of the reviewers, in order to submit the patch, I now need another
> Googler, and he suggested that I email golang-dev@ in order to find
> such a Googler. So that's what I'm doing.
>
> That feels slightly odd to me: do I really need to or want to spam
> this list every time I'm looking to see a patch merged? More
> importantly, do *you* really want to be spammed here every time I'm
> looking to see a patch merged? So this feels like the wrong thing to
> do. But that's what was suggested, so I'll give it a try. If this is
> as much of a faux pas as I assume it is, though, please don't hesitate
> to tell me to go away.

Wow. That took around 90 seconds from pressing send to the patch being
auto-submitted. Thanks! Still feels weird and almost rude to me to
spam the mailing list with a request like this, but it did work...

[Keith Randall]

On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 4:47 PM 'Jason A. Donenfeld' via golang-dev <golan...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Hi,

I used to contribute a lot to Go, and back then, somebody would +2 a
patch, and then I would submit it and it was all very easy. I read
some blog post about how Google was locking down development a bit,
and I sort of lost interest and haven't submitted much in a long time.
But now I'm back at it, provisionally willing to at least see what
these new Google-centric hoops are like.

I've got a patch now here --
https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/615315 -- which is currently
+6, and has one Googler on it (and one ex-Googler). According to one
of the reviewers, in order to submit the patch, I now need another
Googler, and he suggested that I email golang-dev@ in order to find
such a Googler. So that's what I'm doing.

That feels slightly odd to me: do I really need to or want to spam
this list every time I'm looking to see a patch merged? More
importantly, do *you* really want to be spammed here every time I'm
looking to see a patch merged? So this feels like the wrong thing to
do. But that's what was suggested, so I'll give it a try. If this is
as much of a faux pas as I assume it is, though, please don't hesitate
to tell me to go away.

If a CL is all ready to go except for a single missing +1 from a Googler, then you shouldn't need to do anything else. We have a rotation where someone runs a query for all such CLs, does a brief review, and adds a second +1 to them. Normally it can take a workday or so for that to happen.

Were you waiting significantly longer than that?

 

As a side note, I'd be willing to sign whatever document or submit to
whatever background check or sacrifice a goat or whatever would make
supply chain security people or lawyers happy so that I could have my
votes matter as much as Googlers' votes. If the current criteria of
being a Google employee is because those employees have been
appropriately vetted to not be supply chain pranksters, it'd be nice
if I could be vetted the same way too.

Unfortunately I don't think we can do that. Googlers are required for compliance reasons. https://groups.google.com/g/golang-dev/c/K7oGURi0wTM/m/ZhZMqBntAQAJ

 

Thanks ahead of time for the +1.

Jason

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-dev/CAHmME9rA6nfZM5taURYnoQYrcJo_v0exLwAPnRqoAgVnXc319g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jason A. Donenfeld]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 2:13 AM Keith Randall <keith....@gmail.com> wrote:
> If a CL is all ready to go except for a single missing +1 from a Googler, then you shouldn't need to do anything else. We have a rotation where someone runs a query for all such CLs, does a brief review, and adds a second +1 to them. Normally it can take a workday or so for that to happen.
> Were you waiting significantly longer than that?

Ah, so it's basically automated. That's not bad. I wasn't waiting
longer than that, no; somebody just suggested I write here for the +1
so I did it, feeling odd about it. But it sounds like all that's
required is waiting a work day.

>> As a side note, I'd be willing to sign whatever document or submit to
>> whatever background check or sacrifice a goat or whatever would make
>> supply chain security people or lawyers happy so that I could have my
>> votes matter as much as Googlers' votes. If the current criteria of
>> being a Google employee is because those employees have been
>> appropriately vetted to not be supply chain pranksters, it'd be nice
>> if I could be vetted the same way too.
>>
>
> Unfortunately I don't think we can do that. Googlers are required for compliance reasons.

Yea I know that's the current state of affairs with compliance. My
question was more about whether the compliance folks could figure a
way to extend their vetting to non-Googlers. After all, Googlers were
all once non-Googlers too, but got vetted in some way. Anyway, that's
not really a "technical" question that can be easily answered here,
but maybe the idea will stay in somebody's head, and the next time
you're in an elevator with a compliance person, it'll bubble to the
top of your mind, and someday somehow something might happen.

Jason

[brainman]

Welcome back Jason,

Here

https://go.dev/s/needs-review

is a URL I use to check if Googlers with +1 power can see the CL I want to submit.

Sometimes I find that my CLs have unresolved comments or try bots are not run on them, and my CLs won't be listed there. Once everything is fixed, and I can see my CL on the list, it takes a day or two - I am in wrong time zone and I contribute on the weekend.

You can also spam this mailing list (or spam this mail thread), if you don't get help.

Alex

PS: The URL above is from https://groups.google.com/g/golang-dev/c/K7oGURi0wTM/m/HTyfcmY0BwAJ .

[David Chase]

Hi, I'm the guy who was supposed to +1 it.

I got behind a bit because of other release-rotation stuff.

Sorry about that.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-dev+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-dev/5d398461-10e6-4263-aa46-bae457e05647n%40googlegroups.com.