From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp10.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms5.migadu.com with LMTPS id CPVpJdT9qWIORAAAbAwnHQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 17:42:12 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp10.migadu.com with LMTPS id 4ECcJNT9qWKHawEAG6o9tA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 17:42:12 +0200 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42E07862C for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 17:42:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:46486 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o1V9n-0005sX-EW for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 11:42:11 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52064) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o1UgC-0000sx-P2 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 11:11:42 -0400 Received: from ns13.heimat.it ([46.4.214.66]:44600) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o1UgB-0005oH-1K; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 11:11:36 -0400 Received: from localhost (ip6-localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ns13.heimat.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7585B30081F; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:11:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at ns13.heimat.it Received: from ns13.heimat.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ns13.heimat.it [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L9WU9I0ZFpdV; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:11:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bourrache.mug.xelera.it (unknown [93.56.171.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ns13.heimat.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 33D6E30080B; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:11:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from roquette.mug.biscuolo.net (roquette [10.38.2.14]) by bourrache.mug.xelera.it (Postfix) with SMTP id A795F1B9E9C6; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 17:11:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: (nullmailer pid 6961 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:11:26 -0000 From: Giovanni Biscuolo To: zimoun , Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , Arun Isaac Cc: Guix Devel , GNU Guix maintainers Subject: Re: On commit access, patch review, and remaining healthy In-Reply-To: <86fsk7cu1i.fsf@gmail.com> Organization: Xelera.eu References: <86fsk7cu1i.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 17:11:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87tu8mgdwi.fsf@xelera.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=46.4.214.66; envelope-from=g@xelera.eu; helo=ns13.heimat.it X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list 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+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-To: larch@yhetil.org X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1655307732; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post; bh=3sbhT0yaRMUDIHCJhK88v+lq/uq1yWQsYy38PDN6ZOk=; b=aqEUOWdMGoW1MPqfyk2N9L5TEn1V6dl4N+rJgnwQ0sWe982zN1nheFHcZrl62ezUlvGSm9 KJ5KF5lmd+vMbzYCCqLU8QEK+WC8rcMZw7BPoridW7gaVWh8L1gofHiRlUMLL++h133fuH vYWoIDQhW7RBDol1wGSCaVKFIL83W+zZG6fc72LvnnidfsYsTzgiovRWTjyWfEX9reKxD8 7xa8E/4vqGPZHNpknmuv8UKtrFQ4pFotukxu+sLfo87RaE97y+nCJCpsC937aMKhN2P1n8 95UOCmJse9dM6cNN5t8gnFKirWdZx1tUL6LXKsbD4gByHDPB0UK91wC4wSe8cg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1655307732; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=s0O3pe3xX6fIypcRn9HPuofJVeNPFHLDk0yTRU2jFpgYzSk8+Q22sKI9CDpA8RO9rLAtbr IUlIdiCdNUkFY6NS7PXjLxx6ABtfPxHbfGsZqalMquN11u0gbStv1yaLOKmpxvM6OcFHTY bTbxfJd3ihf2RiW6JuOdteMaWNCWpqK4xFt/0pgb22Vtcc9pj+FWawcwjFLrdYtKhFtM6N +Q1OxnOATxVECRUsb4ezqls1PBqBTqFUAVhLwbg2zu4E6oZ9cHI0Wvdd5bWpCNefCcdGQj bG3GG8I1d6T55GreCtwbJo2cZqXGv85i6AHDL6kFwXgcwyUpw72sJLtw6mvZNQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -5.99 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 42E07862C X-Spam-Score: -5.99 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: SzK6fEVgnlVG --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Simon, zimoun writes: > On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 at 11:30, Giovanni Biscuolo 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 =E2=80=9Cmaintainer=E2=80=9D 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: =2D-8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > **automatically** merged every week to the branch =E2=80=9Cstable=E2=80= =9D and by > default user pull =E2=80=9Cstable=E2=80=9D. One week let the time to bui= ld 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? =2D-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 =C2=ABtolling option=C2=BB. 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 =E2=80=9Cguix pull=E2=80=9D breakage despit= e the fact I > did =E2=80=9Cmake as-derivation=E2=80=9D (and I am not convinced it is sy= stematically > 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 > =E2=80=9Cguix lint=E2=80=9D 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=E2=80=99s why, I think the project should: > > 1. change the default branch of =E2=80=9Cgit push=E2=80=9D vs the defaul= t branch of > =E2=80=9Cguix pull=E2=80=9D. 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' =2D-=20 Giovanni Biscuolo Xelera IT Infrastructures --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQJABAEBCgAqFiEERcxjuFJYydVfNLI5030Op87MORIFAmKp9p0MHGdAeGVsZXJh LmV1AAoJENN9DqfOzDkSpw0QAIOE3eXmMaFzKl3BL73k+J85GLY4PTD6/pPS0jZL LuDJk2efPtuLKauMMNtE8C5RfCEUV8QxhnRvKJGt1zOOw1tqPj/iTFUj2avob+U5 CyNaDu8H9vapADBegFfZRu3EtNcaKtXA8ABmxQ6VpYprRVJRwU6rgyxQOcfS4m8I C290jQBWN2RURoB9AtzJ4DS2aW2WMRYrH1GOEBWgoQ0JbQA/vtF0WeJDaJ0PNJy4 7snuLbRVJZ5vgTdKa/FS1vFzlOkdu/Mfgyryi+P5wtfC/JvbSwHOstT1tQnlIXh1 nWSJ1SUCoLENMwSGoG7VvTTz6dJv/BQJJM93AlGuEGd/9jQAFE+mEtF0HaCUGo9S NX6l0tnsUr6Y3BMZiOhRgIvwzL0qxh4hHOnIGWjpNkJykjXUmycuQgqaPDkkBZN7 HKsh7UvJ8yxbExpu+vc0eZ/qHsW0Y2P45Z4ATdZl0i6BQ14KCicfqLXDzudJolpb F8tjOE6OQakwl8pG3uL/jkAfGuSVEGHW4QWJJjcr9FEqJCfoXgoGwpqh0GQn/mmM 0G2xr0Wt5UQ0aT9sSUzY3M+rUoAVNLxcAXL1TjSSC4Sf3bFBUxF0pNZF32+x1REp f2VJ9lWq1LxDE00EoIptUtCEHp71f+J3tLkNYRldcVwqtu5jhZb8vnRklpklHN7l giIA =3rlp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--