From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Wingo Subject: Re: A registry for distributed sources and binaries Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 10:25:55 +0200 Message-ID: <874m7e2kfg.fsf@igalia.com> References: <579027b7.VHXjhpPxQC3AAmeY%pjotr.public12@email> <8760rznoh1.fsf@gnu.org> <20160722004130.GA10340@thebird.nl> <874m7hk6dz.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <20160724033027.GA20236@thebird.nl> <20160724135828.GA6502@solar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38853) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bRbDl-0005IO-K9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 04:26:42 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bRbDh-0004oK-EY for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 04:26:40 -0400 Received: from pb-sasl1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.66]:53082 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bRbDh-0004gD-0O for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 04:26:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160724135828.GA6502@solar> (Andreas Enge's message of "Sun, 24 Jul 2016 15:58:28 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Andreas Enge Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Sun 24 Jul 2016 15:58, Andreas Enge writes: > A problem, as mentioned in another reply, is the lack of people doing code > review, which is not a very rewarding task. That can be changed by everyone > of us :-) Could we just focus on this problem perhaps? One of the issues is that there's no clear reviewer -- anyone just pitches in. We could try to have a culture of asking for particular reviewers, perhaps via the IRC channel. If you build up a relationship with a particular reviewer then they can be your default reviewer, more or less. You put them in the Cc of your mails to the list. This approach has worked well in some other projects I have been involved in. Another is to get Guix to suggest a reviewer. For example if you modify a package, Guix could look at the git history of that file in those lines and see who changed it recently, and suggest a person to Cc. I think Pjotr's example of Elixir was perhaps a bad one. Languages are tricky because they are not leaf nodes in the tree. It's natural for a Guix maintainer to have an opinion on how a language should be integrated into Guix, even if they are not an expert. A fully distributed system sounds nice but it has costs too. In my mind for a project of Guix's target size the best situation would be having around 100 committers or so who have internalized the coding style and patterns of Guix so that they can work more or less directly on the parts they feel comfortable with, posting patches to the list as necessary for feedback. An incoming patch would be assigned to one of those people based on automatic tooling. In that way Guix can scale to the next step while remaining a consistent, hackable project. Andy