Re: Adopt a patch!

Ludovic Courtès transcribed 1.0K bytes: > Hi Thomas, > > I understand and sympathize with your arguments. In fact, this has been > a long running theme, and we discussed it at last year’s FOSDEM at > length. :-) > > Thomas Danckaert skribis: > > > So I do see the appeal of something like gitl

Re: Adopt a patch!

Hi Arun, Apologies for taking almost a month to reply! Arun Isaac skribis: >> At the time, Andy (I think) suggested that collaborative maintainership >> the way we do it might actually “work better” and scale better. In the >> meantime, there have been long discussions in Debian about whether

Re: Adopt a patch!

Hi Ludo and Maxim, I knew I wasn't the first one to complain about the e-mail workflow, but just wanted to the practical problems I've encountered. So thanks for the hints, sorry I missed them the first time. I must admit that I'm not very experienced with gitlab or kallithea (I just see th

Re: Adopt a patch!

Hi Thomas, Thomas Danckaert writes: > I don't mind the e-mail-based workflow in principle, and find it has > some advantages, but there are a few practical issues. I'll list my > frustrations, maybe there are concrete solutions for some of them: > > - I find that saving a long patch series fro

Re: Adopt a patch!

Hi Thomas, I understand and sympathize with your arguments. In fact, this has been a long running theme, and we discussed it at last year’s FOSDEM at length. :-) Thomas Danckaert skribis: > So I do see the appeal of something like gitlab, but I also wonder how > it could be integrated in the

Re: Adopt a patch!

Pjotr Prins writes: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:31:29PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: >> FWIW, I didn’t mean to claim that there are no problems with the >> email-based workflow. I just think that we should improve upon it with >> deliberation instead of jumping to the conclusion that Gitlab or

Re: Adopt a patch!

From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: Adopt a patch! Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 22:31:29 +0200 >>>> It is not only the work load, but also the work-flow […] This means >>>> switching forth and back between mail, shell, and browser. >>> […] >>>> Compare it

Re: Adopt a patch!

everybody want to use an email-based workflow. Yes, one could implement all this in emacs, too. But this is a kind of reinventing the wheel. If you want to scale and want guys like me to adopt a patch, you simply need to retire form this "must be email base" attitude. No offense meant, but

Re: Adopt a patch!

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 10:31:29PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > FWIW, I didn’t mean to claim that there are no problems with the > email-based workflow. I just think that we should improve upon it with > deliberation instead of jumping to the conclusion that Gitlab or Github > would be better.

Re: Adopt a patch!

Maxim Cournoyer writes: > Ricardo Wurmus writes: > >> Hartmut Goebel writes: >> >>> It is not only the work load, but also the work-flow […] This means >>> switching forth and back between mail, shell, and browser. >> […] >>> Compare it with an integrated workflow on e.g. Gitlab or github […]

Re: Adopt a patch!

Adonay Felipe Nogueira transcribed 1.5K bytes: > What about Kallithea ([1])? Alternativelly, we could use the Kallithea has no issue management (I've been slow on working on the package, but upstream is slow aswell, so yeah…). > tasks-and-issue trackers already available from GNU Savannah (althou

Re: Adopt a patch!

I agree. :) I rarely contribute to these places where there is such web interfaces. I like GNU Savannah (and Savane, the software) because it notifies through email like a mailing list would do, but I don't know if one can reply directly to the emails. Debbugs seems supperior because it allows re

Re: Adopt a patch!

Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Hartmut Goebel writes: > >> It is not only the work load, but also the work-flow […] This means >> switching forth and back between mail, shell, and browser. > […] >> Compare it with an integrated workflow on e.g. Gitlab or github […] > > How does even more reliance on a

Re: Adopt a patch!

Hartmut Goebel writes: > It is not only the work load, but also the work-flow […] This means > switching forth and back between mail, shell, and browser. […] > Compare it with an integrated workflow on e.g. Gitlab or github […] How does even more reliance on a browser help here? Surely, we can

Re: Adopt a patch!

What about Kallithea ([1])? Alternativelly, we could use the tasks-and-issue trackers already available from GNU Savannah (although I don't know if this one supports the so called "pull/merge request" buttom). NOTE I don't quite like the "pull/merge request" buttom. I'm in favor of more people hav

Re: Adopt a patch!

Pjotr Prins writes: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 07:52:32PM +0530, Arun Isaac wrote: >> Just thinking out loud: Maybe, we need more people with commit >> access. Theoretically, anyone can review a patch, but ultimately it is >> people with commit access who will have to finally apply and push the >>

Re: Adopt a patch!

Am 19.09.2017 um 16:22 schrieb Arun Isaac: > Just thinking out loud: Maybe, we need more people with commit > access. Theoretically, anyone can review a patch, but ultimately it is > people with commit access who will have to finally apply and push the > patch. As the rate of submission of patches

Re: Adopt a patch!

Pjotr Prins transcribed 1.4K bytes: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 07:52:32PM +0530, Arun Isaac wrote: > > Just thinking out loud: Maybe, we need more people with commit > > access. Theoretically, anyone can review a patch, but ultimately it is > > people with commit access who will have to finally appl

Re: Adopt a patch!

On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 07:52:32PM +0530, Arun Isaac wrote: > Just thinking out loud: Maybe, we need more people with commit > access. Theoretically, anyone can review a patch, but ultimately it is > people with commit access who will have to finally apply and push the > patch. As the rate of submi

Re: Adopt a patch!

> At the time, Andy (I think) suggested that collaborative maintainership > the way we do it might actually “work better” and scale better. In the > meantime, there have been long discussions in Debian about whether > package maintainers should be dropped. Some rightfully argued that > maintaine

Re: Adopt a patch!

l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: [...] > What is more scary is massive imports from external repos (CPAN, etc.). > I think we cannot handle all of it, not with our “quality” guidelines > and not with the pace at which these repos change. > > At the GHM, we were discussing that, probably, we

Re: Adopt a patch!

Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi Arun, > What is more scary is massive imports from external repos (CPAN, etc.). > I think we cannot handle all of it, not with our “quality” guidelines > and not with the pace at which these repos change. > > At the GHM, we were discussing that, probably, we’ll have

Re: Adopt a patch!

Hi Arun, You’re raising good questions. :-) Arun Isaac skribis: > Would it help to have teams of maintainers for specific packages or a > specific category of packages? Perhaps something like Debian has? Right > now, anyone can review any package. But, no one is "responsible" for any > package

Re: Adopt a patch!

Arun Isaac transcribed 0.9K bytes: > > Would it help to have teams of maintainers for specific packages or a > specific category of packages? Perhaps something like Debian has? Right > now, anyone can review any package. But, no one is "responsible" for any > package, and this feels a little chaot

Re: Adopt a patch!

Would it help to have teams of maintainers for specific packages or a specific category of packages? Perhaps something like Debian has? Right now, anyone can review any package. But, no one is "responsible" for any package, and this feels a little chaotic. Also, should we accept any package into

Adopt a patch!

Hello Guix! There are lots of cute little patches in need for love at . We can’t let them alone, they need our help. Sometimes the submitter went away, sometimes the reviewer did, sometimes both. Sometimes the discussion entered bikeshedding territory, the par