On 08.10.2015 16:52, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko > <phco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello, all. I'm sorry for not being available to do enough maintenance >> for GRUB in last time but I was overbooked. Yet there is a good news. At >> Google there is a 20% project and GRUB has been approved as 20% project >> for me. The goal is to have 2.02 released before the end of this year. >> Other than the raw lack of time there is another issue which makes >> maintenance difficult: inefficient VCS. > > VCS is actually OK. The project of size Linux kernel seems to work > well using pull request e-mails. The disadvantages are > > - contributors must have repository available via Internet > - contributors are trusted to actually submit pull request for branch > that was reviewed > - it needs to be done locally and pushed > >> It requires me or >> someone with >> privileges manually copy the patch. What other systems would be ok? It >> obviously has to be a free software and hosted on free software-friendly >> hosting. It also has to have an efficient 1-click merge (so that someone >> with privileges can get any patch submitted to the system merged in >> couple of clicks). >> >> > > It does not like like we have much choice. If we speak about free > external hosting, this is probably github, gerrithub, gitlab. I do not > know if any of them is considered friendly enough by FSF. > > If we speak about self hosting, then it is probably gerrit and > reviewboard (I wish we could join KDE reviewboard, but grub hardly can > be called KDE application ... :) ) > > I am not thrilled by github workflows. From what I could gather > gerrithub looks more appealing, but would love to hear from someone > who actually used both. > I spoke with Stefan Reinauer and he proposed to host us at review.coreboot.org if we don't generate too much traffic. I had positive experiences with their gerrit except that some functions are broken on mobile. I'd like to be able to review from phone but it's not a hard requirement. > One problem is that none of them apparently allows reviewing by > E-Mail. This worked (and probably works, just I'm no more involved) > quite well in KDE reviewboard. This means all review must be done via > web. For me it is rather disadvantage. That's a disadvantage but I believe that being able to get changes merged quickly outweights this disadvantage. > Also merged requests are > removed, which means history and past discussions are no more present. They're kept on review.coreboot.org case > Which again is better using e-mail review. > > _______________________________________________ > Grub-devel mailing list > Grub-devel@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
