From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: [REQ/DISCUSSION] patch managing system Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:15:17 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87h9g0eq1c.fsf@grrlz.net> <87d1qogcfw.fsf@grrlz.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39964) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ai0cG-0006G4-Im for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:15:36 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ai0cA-0001Pn-Ck for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:15:32 -0400 Received: from sinope.bbbm.mdc-berlin.de ([141.80.25.23]:41534) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ai0cA-0001Pf-1N for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:15:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87d1qogcfw.fsf@grrlz.net> 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: Nils Gillmann Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org 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. debbugs has an Emacs interface as well as a read-only web interface. I must admit that I=E2=80=99m not using debbugs regularly for our bug tra= cker because I=E2=80=99m not working on bugs very often. If we really wanted = to track progress on patches we could be using debbugs, but I don=E2=80=99t actually think it would improve the situation much. Right now I=E2=80=99m 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). I don=E2=80=99t think it=E2=80=99s a software problem, but a people probl= em. To deal with more patches we need more people reviewing patches. We already have =E2=80=9Cguix lint=E2=80=9D to point out common problems. We probab= ly 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=E2=80=99d jus= t say: resend a patch if you haven=E2=80=99t received any response within five d= ays or so. ~~ Ricardo