Re: Keeping upstream commits separate from Debian packaging commits (was: Fighting commit storm madness)

2014-10-09 Thread W. Martin Borgert
On 2014-10-10 15:59, Ben Finney wrote: > Agreed. This is a direct result of rebasing Debian packaging history > onto upstream VCS history, and keeping them all in the same repo as one > undifferentiated history, no? Not sure, but isn't this more a result of the scripts in use, to not differentiate

Re: Keeping upstream commits separate from Debian packaging commits (was: Fighting commit storm madness)

2014-10-09 Thread Tianon Gravi
On 9 October 2014 22:59, Ben Finney wrote: > It's a good illustration of why I much prefer the workflow of a separate > VCS for the ‘debian/’ directory, merged with upstream source only at > build time. The results of the merge are in a separate location and are > never checked into VCS, they're u

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:03:38AM -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit : > > Changing the number of commits is solving the wrong problem. The problem > that > needs to be solved is including upstream commits. That's thoroughly > uninteresting for a packaging team. Also, it's not just the mails, i

Keeping upstream commits separate from Debian packaging commits (was: Fighting commit storm madness)

2014-10-09 Thread Ben Finney
Scott Kitterman writes: > Changing the number of commits is solving the wrong problem. The > problem that needs to be solved is including upstream commits. That's > thoroughly uninteresting for a packaging team. Agreed. This is a direct result of rebasing Debian packaging history onto upstream V

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Friday, October 10, 2014 12:56:41 Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:41:47PM -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit : > > On Friday, October 10, 2014 11:08:53 Chow Loong Jin wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 07:57:48PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > > [..] > > > > Presumably "one

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Charles Plessy
Le Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:41:47PM -0400, Scott Kitterman a écrit : > On Friday, October 10, 2014 11:08:53 Chow Loong Jin wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 07:57:48PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > [..] > > > Presumably "one" is the one who set up the git repos. I, for another one, > > > wou

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Friday, October 10, 2014 11:08:53 Chow Loong Jin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 07:57:48PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > [..] > > Presumably "one" is the one who set up the git repos. I, for another one, > > would really appreciate it if someone would take care of this. > > Don't they al

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Chow Loong Jin
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 07:57:48PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: > [..] > Presumably "one" is the one who set up the git repos. I, for another one, > would really appreciate it if someone would take care of this. Don't they all share the hook script? -- Kind regards, Loong Jin signature.asc

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Scott Kitterman
On Friday, October 10, 2014 00:22:42 Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > On 9 October 2014 20:57, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On October 9, 2014 10:43:38 AM EDT, Barry Warsaw wrote: > >>On Oct 09, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > >>>Upstream commits are off topic. > >> > >>Agreed. There's no

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Dimitri John Ledkov
On 9 October 2014 20:57, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On October 9, 2014 10:43:38 AM EDT, Barry Warsaw wrote: >>On Oct 09, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> >>>Upstream commits are off topic. >> >>Agreed. There's no reason why we need notifications of upstream >>commits, >>though I don't

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Scott Kitterman
On October 9, 2014 10:43:38 AM EDT, Barry Warsaw wrote: >On Oct 09, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > >>Upstream commits are off topic. > >Agreed. There's no reason why we need notifications of upstream >commits, >though I don't know if it's possible to filter them out. > >>I'm probably

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Oct 09, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >Upstream commits are off topic. Agreed. There's no reason why we need notifications of upstream commits, though I don't know if it's possible to filter them out. >I'm probably going to give up on hanging out on #debian-python once we get >mo

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Scott Kitterman
On October 9, 2014 5:36:02 AM EDT, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >On Thu, 09 Oct 2014, W. Martin Borgert wrote: >> On 2014-10-09 10:02, Raphael Hertzog wrote: >> > I fixed the default configuration in setup-repository to limit to >20 >> > commits per push as a maximum. And I also limited the size of >ind

Package naming question: fastaq or python3-fastaq (Was: Package Fastaq git mess)

2014-10-09 Thread Andreas Tille
Hi Jorge, On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:27:55AM +0100, Jorge Sebastião Soares wrote: > > > I think I'm going to delete the fastaq.git project on git alioth and > > create > > > a new project. Since the code is python3 only I will call it > > python3-fastaq. > > > > Regarding the name: If it is an *a

Re: Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014, W. Martin Borgert wrote: > On 2014-10-09 10:02, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > I fixed the default configuration in setup-repository to limit to 20 > > commits per push as a maximum. And I also limited the size of individual > > commit emails to 1000 lines. > > I wonder, whether s

Re: Fighting commit storm madness

2014-10-09 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
> I wonder, whether some kind of digest function would be possible > and useful? how's getting 1 email with 100 upstream commits different to getting 100 emails with upstream commits? (other than it's easier to read these 100 emails and a bit easier to delete digest one) -- Piotr Ożarowski

Fighting commit storm madness (was: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1)

2014-10-09 Thread W. Martin Borgert
(Please, when using email, choose an appropriate subject. Thanks!) On 2014-10-09 10:02, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > I fixed the default configuration in setup-repository to limit to 20 > commits per push as a maximum. And I also limited the size of individual > commit emails to 1000 lines. I wonder,

Re: [Python-modules-commits] [python-mplexporter] 135/135: Merge pull request #30 from rainwoodman/patch-1

2014-10-09 Thread Raphael Hertzog
On Thu, 09 Oct 2014, Sandro Tosi wrote: > so is there any chance you stop this commit storm madness anytime > soon? another bunch of >300 commit messages arrive this night I fixed the default configuration in setup-repository to limit to 20 commits per push as a maximum. And I also limited the