Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> On May 21, 2016, at 11:36 PM, Amber Hawkie Brown > wrote: > > >> On 22 May 2016, at 14:32, Glyph wrote: >> >> >>> On May 21, 2016, at 11:21 PM, Amber Hawkie Brown >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 22 May 2016, at 14:15, Glyph wrote: Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. I know that PRs

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

>>> A lot of projects do follow this workflow, and maybe it will be fine for >>> us. The real question is; is FreeBSD support really worth it for the cost >>> to contributors, since that's the only platform we currently support but >>> can't test? >> >> I'm guessing that we have more FreeBSD

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

Ah finally a fine bike shedding thread that gets everyone involved. ;) > Right now, we need to manually vet each change before sending it to > buildbots, because they are shared mutable environments that we can't afford > to have running untrusted code automatically. If we could switch to Travi

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> On May 22, 2016, at 12:09 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote: > > A lot of projects do follow this workflow, and maybe it will be fine for us. The real question is; is FreeBSD support really worth it for the cost to contributors, since that's the only platform we currently support bu

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> On May 22, 2016, at 12:15 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote: > > Ah finally a fine bike shedding thread that gets everyone involved. ;) > >> Right now, we need to manually vet each change before sending it to >> buildbots, because they are shared mutable environments that we can't afford >> to have

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Glyph wrote: > > Right now, we need to manually vet each change before sending it to > buildbots, because they are shared mutable environments that we can't > afford to have running untrusted code automatically. > This is quite useful actually. We would need a t

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> On May 22, 2016, at 12:15 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote: > > Ah finally a fine bike shedding thread that gets everyone involved. ;) OKAY NOW THAT I'VE GOT YOU ALL HERE LET'S TALK ABOUT https://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/288 *slams a metal grating shut over the only exit from the mailing list

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> On 22 May 2016, at 15:23, Glyph wrote: > > >> On May 22, 2016, at 12:15 AM, Hynek Schlawack wrote: >> >> Ah finally a fine bike shedding thread that gets everyone involved. ;) > > OKAY NOW THAT I'VE GOT YOU ALL HERE LET'S TALK ABOUT > https://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/288 > > *slams

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> On May 22, 2016, at 12:24 AM, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Glyph > wrote: > > Right now, we need to manually vet each change before sending it to > buildbots, because they are shared mutable environments that we can't afford >

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

On May 22, 2016 9:36:28 AM GMT+02:00, Glyph wrote: >[..] >(Please nobody try to do the clever thing where you configure buildbot >to automatically pull all PRs, that would effectively negate any >security protections...) > >I've been assuming that in the worst-case scenario, we'd do what >Cryptogr

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

On Sun, 22 May 2016 at 10:12 Ralph Meijer wrote: > On May 22, 2016 9:36:28 AM GMT+02:00, Glyph > wrote: > >[..] > >(Please nobody try to do the clever thing where you configure buildbot > >to automatically pull all PRs, that would effectively negate any > >security protections...) > > > >I've be

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> > The thing is, if you perceive it as "hostile" that a project closes a PR - > i.e. "says that they're not going to do more work on it" - that is a > cultural problem; it suggests a certain implicit level of passive > aggression in opening a PR which I don't want to assume. It's sort of like > h

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> On May 22, 2016, at 6:18 AM, Clayton Daley wrote: > > The thing is, if you perceive it as "hostile" that a project closes a PR - > i.e. "says that they're not going to do more work on it" - that is a cultural > problem; it suggests a certain implicit level of passive aggression in > opening

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

> > "You can't: > >- require test coverage, >- require documentation, >- require coding standard compliance, >- require people to file a ticket before sending a patch to the >mailing list, > > The first three of these are *already* norms in all of the OSS projects of this calibe

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

Twisted has been enforcing these rules since before they were considered part of the norm and I believe that Glyph was referencing is that back then people said that Twisted was going to fail or w/e because of requiring those things. Sent from my iPhone > On May 22, 2016, at 9:12 PM, Clayton D

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

Glyph writes: > This is a very useful data point. I do not have any concrete > experience with it and I was kind of wondering about this. FWIW, Tahoe-LAFS *just* started using AppVeyor too, and I also find it horrifically slow. That said, the Tahoe tests run pretty slowly on a VirtualBox window

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

Personally, I find closing PRs that aren't going to be merged "soon" mostly-beneficial. Even if it *might* be perceived as "hostile" by some contributers, a simple explanation should suffice. (And, if simply closing a PR with a nice note explaining, "please re-open when X is fixed/changed" scares

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

I submitted this PR, which is now closed: https://github.com/twisted/twisted/pull/62 I don't want to re-open that PR, but I am using that as an example As an example, if I wanted to re-open that, how would I go about doing it? I am not an administrator of the Twisted GitHub project, so on that we

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

Mark has been working on a bot which would reopen it with a comment: https://github.com/markrwilliams/txghbot - Amber > On 23 May 2016, at 12:56, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > I submitted this PR, which is now closed: > https://github.com/twisted/twisted/pull/62 > > I don't want to re-open that

Re: [Twisted-Python] overview: new review queue venue

Note that even without the bot, I believe you can just create a new PR for the same branch, so it's not *too* bad, but definitely a little clunky. On Mon, 23 May 2016 at 06:59 Amber "Hawkie" Brown wrote: > Mark has been working on a bot which would reopen it with a comment: > https://github.com/