Won't it be better to add a custom field for gerrit patchs to ease the search of them and take the need to skim the whole thread to find a comment with a link to gerrit patch?

I suggested it here:

https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39399

we might have some benefits if we rethink the entire bug workflow.

On 08/27/2012 01:59 PM, Marcin Cieslak wrote:

...

• user A posts a patch
• the bug gets "patch", "patch-need-review"
• user B posts a patch that is different and says he does not like patch of A
• user B submits change to gerrit

When "need-review" should be removed?

User B should remove "need-review". Code in gerrit has its own review process and it shouldn't be necessary to keep the keywords in Bugzilla up to date. User B should make sure that the bug has a comment referring to his gerrit submission.

...

What if I believe that core ideas behind the patch are wrong?

Leave a comment with your thoughts. You could also remove the "need-review" keyword and, optionally, mark the patch as obsolete. Marking it as obsolete is a pretty strong statement, though.

...

What if I just think the implementation should be improved?

Remove the "need-review" and leave a comment with your suggestions. Directing the submitter to gerrit for future submissions is a good idea, too, but that might add another step that that makes future submissions improbable.

...

What it it's more or less okay?

Remove the "need-review" keyword and direct the submitter to gerrit or submit it to gerrit on their behalf. Make sure you refer to the bug number in first line of the commit message (see https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/13855/ for an example). Other people will then have a chance to review it and it may be merged.

If you don't have a gerrit account, apply for one or find someone who does to apply the patch.

...

Before I open a whole can of worms by asking a question how do I relate those keywords to the Gerrit workflow we have

Oops! I guess I opened the can and not you!

Mark.