On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Matthew Finkel <matthew.fin...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 11/03/2012 08:38 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote: > [...] > > Okay, sounds like we've got some enthusiasm. Let's get started. I > > volunteer to review commits and if people ask me to, and suggest that > > asking me to review stuff for a while might be a smart idea. I just gave > > myself commit access to the g...@git-rw.torproject.org repo too, in case > > that helps. I am not planning to be a primary author here. > > Thanks for adding one more thing to your plate! I know Jake can handle > this but the more eyes we have looking at these initial changes the > better it'll be. > > > > > Given the amount of people asking us to apply and/or warning us that we > > mustn't apply particular patches, I'm going to suggest the following > > principles for a while: > > * LET'S START MINIMAL. Let's stick to doing only the very major > bugfixes > > and obvious fixes for at least the next release or two, so that something > > usable comes out. > > Agreed. To be honest, I haven't really looked at the code too much, so > I'll start diving into that in a bit. (If there isn't one already...I > haven't checked) Can we get a trac component added so we can track > progress and such? Done. At some point we should migrate issues from google code, but IMO that's best done once we have something nontrivial to show for our efforts. > > * NO ARCHITECTURAL ASTRONAUTICS. I'm always tempted when I come to a > > codebase for the first time to refactor the heck out of it. Let's avoid > > doing that till we have a little experience with this codebase. There > > isn't all that much here: let's > > Yes...let's! :) > > Was there supposed to be more to that sentence? Yeah; sometimes I start a sentence, then I think of something to write elsewhere and start another sentence, but then by the time I'm done with that one I don't remember the first sentence any more, so it That one should end with "There isn't all that much code here; let's make sure we understand it pretty thoroughly before we complexify it in the name of some half-glimpsed vision." > > * LOVE MEANS GET TESTED. If at all possible, we should make this > codebase > > easier to test (right now it wants you to install before testing), and > > improve the coverage of the tests so that (if as people suspect) we're > > likely to break things on one platform when we fix them on another, we > can > > at least find out fast whether a patch works everywhere. > > > > Certainly sounds like a good idea. I'm going to have to familiarize > myself with some of the other *nix platforms it does/should support. > Just looking through the current issues on google code, for example, I > don't know the internals of OSX well enough *yet* to know if [1] is even > possible. But once we've compiled a list of all the current critical > patches, Debian and others (assuming such a list doesn't exist already), > then we start applying, testing, revising, etc. :) > > [1] https://code.google.com/p/torsocks/issues/detail?id=41 Hm. Supposedly, it's _supposed_ to work on OSX. It has a lot of code for OSX support. I just tried it with curl on my osx laptop, and it seemed to work okay. -- Nick _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list tor-talk@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
