unofficial mirror of guix-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Giovanni Biscuolo <g@xelera.eu>
To: zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>,
	"Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>,
	"Arun Isaac" <arunisaac@systemreboot.net>
Cc: Guix Devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>,
	GNU Guix maintainers <guix-maintainers@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 17:11:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tu8mgdwi.fsf@xelera.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86fsk7cu1i.fsf@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3393 bytes --]

Hi Simon,

zimoun <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 at 11:30, Giovanni Biscuolo <g@xelera.eu> wrote:
>
>>> It reduces a bit the pressure on the committers, IMHO.
>>
>> It raises a bit the pressure on the maintainers, IMHO :-)
>
> What does it mean “maintainer” here?

Guix maintainers

> Maybe I miss something but I do not think the Guix maintainers play a
> special role in reviewing or committing.

not directly but they oversee the entire process, no?

> Could you explain which pressure you are envisioning?

it was explained above your quotation in my original message, IMHO this
is the pressure:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---

> **automatically** merged every week to the branch “stable” and by
> default user pull “stable”.  One week let the time to build by the CI,
> check everything is fine and fix otherwise.

This means that if the fix is not committed (rebased?) in that weekly
timerfame the problematic patch is automatically pushed to stable
without a fix; also we'll have that problematic commit in stable anyway
(affecting users like me that are "pinning" specific channels?), unless
we rebase "unstable"... "manually": am I wrong?

--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

IMVHO automatic merges once a week from something /possibly/ not working
to "stable" is not a good solution to the problem of reviwers scarcity

>> I understand there is a certain "entrance barrier" to become patch
>> reviewer, but I'm afraid we cannot lower it more than the current
>> situation except for the offload build server and more tolling options.
>
> I am missing the meaning of «tolling option».

sorry, my intention was to write "tooling options", meaning the range of
tools available to committers/reviewers to automate some tasks

> I think it is possible to lower a bit the reviewing barrier.  Today, the
> patch submission is very flexible:

IMHO this is a good thing, it lowers the barrier for new contributors

[...]

> For instance, consider submission #47171 [1].

seen

> It was not my first contribution, it was not the first review by
> Ricardo, and we both missed a “guix pull” breakage despite the fact I
> did “make as-derivation” (and I am not convinced it is systematically
> done ;-)).

as Ludo' was suggesting, maybe we could start with a checklist and then
see what we can automate?

> Another example, when working of Preservation of Guix [2], I noticed
> that many packages using git-fetch were not in SWH; which means that
> “guix lint” had not been run on these packages.

is there any way to force it (along with other linting) when commiting?

> We could answer more automated tools on infra side, etc. which is the
> direction to go.  But we are not there yet and things need to be done
> today. :-)  That’s why, I think the project should:
>
>  1. change the default branch of “git push” vs the default branch of
>  “guix pull”.

sorry I don't understand what this means

>  2. add a bit more of checkers on patch submission easing patch
>  review.

I guess you mean "automatic checkers": I agree that checking tools
are good (something is missing in "guix lint"?)

[...]

Thank you! Gio'

-- 
Giovanni Biscuolo

Xelera IT Infrastructures

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 849 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-06-15 15:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-02 15:10 On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-02 20:22 ` Brian Cully via Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution.
2022-06-03 19:37   ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-03 21:17     ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-06-07  7:08     ` Efraim Flashner
2022-06-07 15:11       ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-08 11:39         ` Efraim Flashner
2022-06-08 21:10           ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-20 12:53         ` Hartmut Goebel
2022-06-21 15:44           ` zimoun
2022-06-22  9:19             ` Munyoki Kilyungi
2022-06-02 20:32 ` Pier-Hugues Pellerin
2022-06-03 19:42   ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-02 21:35 ` Luis Felipe
2022-06-03  8:22   ` Feed on specific topic (public-inbox?) zimoun
2022-06-03 10:51     ` zimoun
2022-06-06 12:11 ` On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy Arun Isaac
2022-06-06 21:43   ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-07  6:44     ` zimoun
2022-06-08  9:30       ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-14 12:24         ` zimoun
2022-06-15  7:01           ` Arun Isaac
2022-06-15  9:19             ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-19  6:55             ` Paul Jewell
2022-06-20 12:11               ` Arun Isaac
2022-06-15 15:11           ` Giovanni Biscuolo [this message]
2022-06-08 10:54     ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-09 19:55     ` Arun Isaac
2022-06-08  9:49   ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-09 19:50     ` Arun Isaac
2022-06-10 12:27       ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-10 15:03         ` Efraim Flashner
2022-06-10 16:10           ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-10 16:26           ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-10 15:03         ` Maxime Devos
2022-06-11  4:13         ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2022-06-11  9:37           ` Ludovic Courtès
2022-06-14 11:54           ` zimoun
2022-06-14 15:54             ` Maxim Cournoyer
2022-06-15  6:46               ` Arun Isaac
2022-06-13 12:19         ` Arun Isaac
     [not found] <mailman.12124.1654864076.1231.guix-devel@gnu.org>
2022-06-12  8:18 ` Ricardo Wurmus
2022-06-12  9:42   ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-12 13:10     ` Maxime Devos
2022-06-13  9:34       ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-13 10:48         ` Maxime Devos
2022-06-13 14:21           ` Giovanni Biscuolo
2022-06-12  8:21 ` Ricardo Wurmus

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://guix.gnu.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87tu8mgdwi.fsf@xelera.eu \
    --to=g@xelera.eu \
    --cc=arunisaac@systemreboot.net \
    --cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=guix-maintainers@gnu.org \
    --cc=ludo@gnu.org \
    --cc=zimon.toutoune@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).