On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 23:29:56 +0800 Thomas Goirand <z...@debian.org> wrote:
> On 08/15/2014 11:53 PM, The Wanderer wrote: > > It's also something the Linux kernel is still doing, with apparent > > success. > > Yes, the Linux kernel is a successful project. Does this mean using a > list for reviewing patches is a good thing? No! The workflow with a list > is simply horrible. Using git-review and gerrit is so much better. > > > I for one consider it to be a much more public, transparent, and > > discoverable way to let proposed patches and the review of same be open > > to public view, compared to the way various other projects seem to do > > it. > > > > Making sure everything passes through the mailing list, and most if not > > all substantive discussion happens on the mailing list, is a lot better > > than having some discussion on the mailing lists and some on a bug > > tracker and some on IRC and some via private mail and so on. (The most > > ridiculously extreme example of this fragmentation that I know of is > > probably the Mozilla project.) > > This reasoning may work when you have only a small amount of information > to read. When you are overwhelmed with it, having different places to do > different things is a much better approach. Sending patches to a list > simply doesn't scale. > > Also, with a list, it's not convenient at all to point out a line in a > patch in a mailing list. You must extract the relevant lines, cut/past > them, and comment them. Instead, double clicking on the line of the > patch which is displayed on a web interface is much more convenient. What? Most patches are posted inline (with git-send-email). > > There's nothing wrong with having discussion in those various areas, of > > course; it's probably inevitable, and it's even a good thing. It's just > > that it's a lot harder for someone not intimately involved with the > > project to follow discussion if it happens in such a variety of places, > > and there's value to be found in making sure that everything passes > > through one central (discussion-enabled) point before landing. > > Lists are good tools for discussing where a project should go, release > goals, and so on. They aren't good tools to do patch reviews. I've used > both, and I'm convinced of that. What we need is solving the FFmpeg/Libav split, not "well-meant" suggestions by outsiders how to change our development model. > Thomas Goirand (zigo) > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-de...@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140816174433.1f3f496b@debian