From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philippe Vaucher Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 09:28:34 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1552789070.5272.1@yandex.ru> <1552791707.5272.2@yandex.ru> <1552793646.5272.3@yandex.ru> <1552821396.21432.0@yandex.ru> <83imwhwf4x.fsf@gnu.org> <837ecvux2q.fsf@gnu.org> <9c7cf558-a2d3-951e-d6e1-31b3ad5900cf@yandex.ru> <1553064994.13109.0@yandex.ru> <831s32t3fn.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c799bc05849687f4" Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="157208"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: Tim Cross , Emacs developers , Dmitry Gutov , Konstantin Kharlamov To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 21 09:45:58 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h6tKn-000ebv-UE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 09:45:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33317 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h6tKm-0005tn-Rx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 04:45:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50472) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h6tJO-0005r0-1X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 04:44:31 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h6t4V-0003LX-1T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 04:29:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::233]:45455) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h6t4R-0003HK-Ap; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 04:29:03 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id y6so4539597ljd.12; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 01:29:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7yV4NhzLoZ0ISG9pY9S4wqkZUtBNOBsMnjn0TPKimN4=; b=mfXaegtK4Ybud93pCXWJimlJc3coI6ytyVt3hkRZ19sMDfeQhjxwFGG0CSi6FIubyy tgWeVYQFQXnLqij2cMQzr5RUIzSbCpPj1UBkFBXEZ5a/+OCfre3ba/2EEijlUvLu86FS J4f2LCcPuvp/yVSvWhlRuCiRgzZmXQ7zyaxyyjdUG+nL1ZZ02uFLBLxHfZFOXjoz8mYq z8NCVqxW2fhuDcI22X9cbGPYFG9nqHGkQf1weN+fMX/U/oKYl6QNdlH0P8nBg18CvnGV qldGdSqGODr/01MRGB8idEkFG440b2aq1kNqtsqF3bqg07JHs9ECBe4mNj3cRkZIpOKJ I/Cg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7yV4NhzLoZ0ISG9pY9S4wqkZUtBNOBsMnjn0TPKimN4=; b=FSx43/LaXg/KFcCnYgcgI5IKyX9EFjMPpSCN1KsswVh9WSN5w2SEi4BTQ9ExDELDhp Qyaok8LVcKcdLmyshl2/kvS5HypU13+isTgtXH3qbldVQVzv8o5x52xVlJ8gMb5d0Ta4 X/IApHty6bJeaMN6bsWT54pAwmn6/vA3jYMxbOTT8XgU3q24hXvVeiZo4j2L9zECBk/f Hj6inTiXkQd+32zljGVC1ij4kLLxQf1KzyW/I8k5LCke+4k/7MF+GYCovTSPDdLJgJcf Hu1PeWgdJ3/fPZdyxmI9PXbtIB4ldvz4keH8PT2RziYvo0N2UykVXs6wDflEajTOtBgE viFA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVnRY3thn+Q0OfdNix6YkMZSM1+Mf+EbQZn+0Ki5qF9Yaxn4mcQ ZouIc9Cfor21n/s7kFsdbS3i6oAUmr0W3fbTdN6vzSA1IiBZxg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwnn36yjutbS84dALUVujli+rs2o529T7KYSdFxMRMdO7hniz6R2W6IJ7xvbL/ftpsFKWx7EEW00outBijPvvg= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:380c:: with SMTP id f12mr1268792lja.116.1553156941517; Thu, 21 Mar 2019 01:29:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <831s32t3fn.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4864:20::233 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:234453 Archived-At: --000000000000c799bc05849687f4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Recent years saw a lot of change in Emacs infrastructure and > maintenance procedures -- we moved from CVS to Bazaar to Git, we > removed some of the obstacles to newcomers, such as ChangeLog files, > we codified the most important parts of the procedures in CONTRIBUTE, > etc. This indeed brought welcome new contributors, but the growth is > very slow, and the impact on the patch review process and on the > number of people who are proficient in core parts of the internals is > still very much minor and inadequate, IMO. E.g., the backlog in patch > review and in solving reported issues is still unsatisfactory. It was a nice effort on your part but I feel those changes are unlikely to really bring a lot of newcomers. Github/Gitlab users want to have things like this: https://github.com/bbatsov/projectile/pull/1386 https://github.com/moby/moby/pull/38823 https://github.com/Silex/docker-emacs/pull/24 Things to watch for: - Contributions templates (checkboxes, descriptions) - Tags/Labels for easier filtering of issues that affect X or Y - Inline code review, with code highlighting, which you can then "resolve" and push new versions that are hidden by default so you only see the latest relevant - CI bots that builds & tests your change, report breakage (travis-ci) or display code coverage changes (codedov) - Tabs at the top for status of the PR, commits, files changed, checks done - Quickly view modified file history / filtering which files to display - Cross referencing of issues I could go on & on about things that the tool does for you instead of you having to grep, find-name-dired, find-file, magit-log-buffer-file etc. With the mailing list the number of things you have to keep in your head or do manually is huge compared to when using these tools. Now, I understand that you probably see all this as more work, without any guarantee that the number of contributors will increase... so you are right to ask for people wanting these changes to become more involved. I hope I helped a bit in painting a better picture of why these tools feel "essential" to us, but they are also tied to a more general workflow/mindset and that is probably the crux of the issue. Kind regards, Philippe --000000000000c799bc05849687f4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Recen= t years saw a lot of change in Emacs infrastructure and
maintenance procedures -- we moved from CVS to Bazaar to Git, we
removed some of the obstacles to newcomers, such as ChangeLog files,
we codified the most important parts of the procedures in CONTRIBUTE,
etc.=C2=A0 This indeed brought welcome new contributors, but the growth is<= br> very slow, and the impact on the patch review process and on the
number of people who are proficient in core parts of the internals is
still very much minor and inadequate, IMO.=C2=A0 E.g., the backlog in patch=
review and in solving reported issues is still unsatisfactory.
=

It was a nice effort on your part but I feel those chan= ges are unlikely to really bring a lot of newcomers. Github/Gitlab users wa= nt to have things like this:

Things to watch for:
  • Contributions tem= plates (checkboxes, descriptions)
  • Tags/Labels for easier filtering = of issues that affect X or Y
  • Inline code review, with code highligh= ting, which you can then "resolve" and push new versions that are= hidden by default so you only see the latest relevant
  • CI bots = that builds & tests your change, report breakage (travis-ci) or display= code coverage changes (codedov)
  • Tabs at the top for status of the = PR, commits, files changed, checks done
  • Quickly view modified file = history / filtering which files to display
  • Cross referencing of iss= ues
I could go on & on about things that the tool does fo= r you instead of you having to grep, find-name-dired, find-file, magit-log-= buffer-file etc.

With the mailing list the n= umber of things you have to keep in your head or do manually is huge compar= ed to when using these tools.

Now, I understand th= at you probably see all this as more work, without any guarantee that the n= umber of contributors will increase... so you are right to ask for people w= anting these changes to become more involved.

I ho= pe I helped a bit in painting a better picture of why these tools feel &quo= t;essential" to us, but they are also tied to a more general workflow/= mindset and that is probably the crux of the issue.

Kind regards,
Philippe


--000000000000c799bc05849687f4--