From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Vong Subject: Re: Tracking package submissions with Debbugs Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2016 10:21:17 +0800 Message-ID: <87fupg1k2q.fsf@gmail.com> References: <57B1AD4D.2080907@goebel-consult.de> <20160815153059.7c8201e6@scratchpost.org> <87h9am5aco.fsf@gmail.com> <57B2BEDA.2020202@goebel-consult.de> <874m6kbyg4.fsf@gmail.com> <57B5A049.6070206@goebel-consult.de> <87wpiwruyd.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87inuf27h7.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <20160902002755.GA30382@jocasta.intra> <87vayfm821.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <8737liam03.fsf@gmail.com> <87fupimq6n.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <87lgz9u8eq.fsf@gmail.com> <877fatm6x4.fsf@gnu.org> 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]:51087) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bgN3p-0008Gh-SQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 22:21:31 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bgN3m-0006Kl-Gx for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 22:21:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <877fatm6x4.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Sat, 03 Sep 2016 15:47:35 +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: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, ng0 ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > Alex Vong skribis: > >> Ricardo Wurmus writes: >> >>> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >>> >>>> I suppose it wouldn=E2=80=99t handle patch series very well though, wo= uld it? >>>> Or people would have to send the =E2=80=9Ccover letter=E2=80=9D of the= series first, and >>>> then send the rest to NNN@debbugs.gnu.org once a number has been >>>> assigned? >>> >>> Or could we have a bug per module? Then the whole patch series could be >>> sent to the bug id of the module. But I guess this would make it harder >>> to keep track of individual package submissions again, because bug would >>> rarely ever be closed when there are lots of patches to the same module. >>> >> Yes, I think it will make it harder to keep track of individual >> package. Is there a way to configure git-sendmail to do what we want? >> >> Here is a related idea. If we were to send all packaging bug reports to >> a single package (e.g. guix-package), then it will make it impossible to >> browse from a web browser. The situation is similar to the slowness of >> our Packages page[0]. So instead of having a bug per module, should we >> have a package per module (e.g. guix-package-emacs, guix-package-maths, >> guix-package-shells ...)? > > I think that wouldn=E2=80=99t scale, and would also prevent us to have a = global > view of all the pending submissions (not to mention that debbugs.gnu.org > is administered by non-Guix people and they=E2=80=99d quickly be annoyed = ;-)). > > So, let=E2=80=99s ask for guix-package@gnu.org (or guix-patches@gnu.org?)= to > begin with? > I see. Right now, emacs has about 3766 non-archived bugs, and it takes 12 - 15 seconds to load the bug page in tor browser / firefox, which is still acceptable. Guix now has about 3958 packages, so I will guess it will take similar time to load?=20 About scalibility, I also find that the split will make it difficult to search for a particular package, since the web-based interface only support for searching up to 2 packages at once. So yes, I think we should ask for guix-package@gnu.org to begin. >>>> What=E2=80=99s unclear to me is how convenient Debbugs is for non-Emac= s users: >>>> Emacs has M-x debbugs-gnu, which is a significant UI improvement, but >>>> how do non-Emacs users deal with Debbugs? >>> >>> Outside of Emacs I only ever used Debbugs in read-only fashion. The web >>> interface is not very pretty but it=E2=80=99s functional and looks bett= er than >>> the default mailman interface. >>> >> Yes, it is still email-based. The web interface is read-only, you can >> search for bug reports in a package[1]. To reply to it, you send email >> to . For non-emacs users, this means >> they have to use email client to communicate and web browser to search / >> read bugs. > > Yeah well, better than the Mailman interface. > I forget to mention: This reminds me of the old joke: Emacs is an operating system that needs a better editor :) > Thanks, > Ludo=E2=80=99.