From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nils Gillmann Subject: Re: [REQ/DISCUSSION] patch managing system Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:34:47 +0100 Message-ID: <87egb3vr08.fsf@grrlz.net> References: <87h9g0eq1c.fsf@grrlz.net> <87d1qogcfw.fsf@grrlz.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45509) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ai0vI-0004Ix-J1 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:35:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ai0vE-0006Df-I9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:35:12 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:42405) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ai0vE-0006DC-BW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:35:08 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ai0vB-00031t-N9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:35:05 +0100 Received: from xd9bb81a1.dyn.telefonica.de ([217.187.129.161]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:35:05 +0100 Received: from niasterisk by xd9bb81a1.dyn.telefonica.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:35:05 +0100 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-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: guix-devel@gnu.org Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Nils Gillmann writes: > >> First follow up idea: >> >> Ideal case would be: >> - integration with Guix in the future (the emacs interface and >> other potential future interfaces) >> - integration into Guix website >> - patches can be marked: >> - state (done/open) >> - priority >> - patches can be assigned to more than 1 person >> - webinterface >> >> As we are not at the ideal case and need a software until we get >> there, most projects seem to either use mailman, bugzilla, >> something equal to prmon.freebsd.org (ports monitor), simple pull >> requests on a mirror on a bigger source control system. > > I have a very strong aversion to bugzilla and other complicated tracking > systems. All of the above points are covered by debbugs, which we > already use for bug tracking. That's right, rain1 pointed this out to me in irc some moments ago. > debbugs has an Emacs interface as well as a read-only web interface. > > I must admit that I’m not using debbugs regularly for our bug tracker > because I’m not working on bugs very often. If we really wanted to > track progress on patches we could be using debbugs, but I don’t > actually think it would improve the situation much. > > Right now I’m capturing guix-devel emails that I want to look at later > with Org capture, or I simply leave them in an unread state. The > problem, in my opinion, is not so much keeping track of patches, but > taking the time to review and engage in discussions. I cannot review as > much as I would like to and for follow up discussions I often miss time > (in front of the computer, and in a reasonably awake state). Would it make sense to have a patches-only list or at least a separation between [general not-patch-related disussions, questions, pre-bug report questions] and [patches and their discussions]? This would not fix the people and times situation but eventually prevent situations in the future where we only have -devel for discussions, questions, patches, pre-bug questions, and with a growing number of participants more reviewers might come, but also more questions and other non-patch related input on the list, making it /maybe/ difficult to follow. I think it's better to think ahead and solve problems before they become problems, but maybe this is too soon. (sidenote: I envision something for much later which I will discuss in another project and see if it fits into what we (in that project) focus on, maybe in a couple of years it could be useful.) > I don’t think it’s a software problem, but a people problem. To deal > with more patches we need more people reviewing patches. We already > have “guix lint” to point out common problems. We probably should add a > little helper script for all non-Emacsers that runs Emacs over the > expression to check the indentation. But other than that I’d just say: > > resend a patch if you haven’t received any response within five days or > so. >From my perspective, resending does not really help either. It fills up the mailinglist with duplicates and unless I mention which of these threads can be considered closed, any version could be seen as the patch and it only works around the problem you mentioned and I see - too little people to review and apply patches. -- ng personal contact: http://krosos.sdf.org EDN: https://wiki.c3d2.de/EDN