* github... need suggestions from you. @ 2014-12-09 8:24 Bryan Hundven 2014-12-09 10:02 ` Andreas Bießmann [not found] ` <0d794377584821026613224bfd6c4418@biessmann.de> 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-09 8:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: crossgcc maillist List, Prior to github, you'd 'git send-email' a change, it would be peer reviewed here, and once approved, it was applied. Post github, you fork the repo, make a branch, commit your changes, and approvals are done prior to merging the change. From the test run I've done in the last couple of days, this hasn't worked out so well. And I'm looking for suggestions with this workflow. The major problem is that there is seemingly no way to have notifications of pull requests go to this mailing list: http://blog.wikichoon.com/2014/04/github-doesnt-support-pull-request.html So peer review must happen on github. I don't like this and I'm sure you'd like to review things too. The next problem is that my changes haven't been peer-reviewed, which lead to some mishaps with some linaro changes (which ultimately needs to be rewritten anyways, as there is a better way to manage that using kconfig options that are already in place). So, I need to eat the dog food and do pull requests myself. I'm not going to merge any changes until we can all agree on the workflow, so please post your thoughts on this topic. Thanks, -Bryan -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-09 8:24 github... need suggestions from you Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-09 10:02 ` Andreas Bießmann [not found] ` <0d794377584821026613224bfd6c4418@biessmann.de> 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andreas Bießmann @ 2014-12-09 10:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Hundven; +Cc: crossgcc maillist resent due to spam message (ml + ml-owner) Dear Bryan, On 2014-12-09 09:24, Bryan Hundven wrote: > List, > > Prior to github, you'd 'git send-email' a change, it would be peer > reviewed here, and once approved, it was applied. > > Post github, you fork the repo, make a branch, commit your changes, > and approvals are done prior to merging the change. I personally dislike this change. I'll not get an github account just for adding changes to ct-ng. Maybe I'm a bit out-of-date, but I really like the 'git send-email' feature and can't get familiar with latest evolutions in opensource development tools and work-flows. It seems others can't either. U-Boot tried to implement gerrit [1] which would also be a drastic change in how to work together. Finally this was stopped in favour of the old fashioned way. All I'd like to say is: Bryan, if you think going to github is a good idea, please do so. But please also accept that at least some still want to send their changes via mail. If going to github also means we kill the list, the mail would finally end at your address. best regards Andreas Bießmann [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/173795 -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <0d794377584821026613224bfd6c4418@biessmann.de>]
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. [not found] ` <0d794377584821026613224bfd6c4418@biessmann.de> @ 2014-12-09 12:15 ` Bryan Hundven 2014-12-09 13:40 ` Tom Janson 2014-12-10 11:36 ` Andreas Bießmann 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-09 12:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andreas Bießmann; +Cc: crossgcc maillist Andreas, On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:56 AM, Andreas Bießmann <andreas@biessmann.de> wrote: > Dear Bryan, > > On 2014-12-09 09:24, Bryan Hundven wrote: >> >> List, >> >> Prior to github, you'd 'git send-email' a change, it would be peer >> reviewed here, and once approved, it was applied. >> >> Post github, you fork the repo, make a branch, commit your changes, >> and approvals are done prior to merging the change. > > > I personally dislike this change. I'll not get an github account just for > adding changes to ct-ng. > Maybe I'm a bit out-of-date, but I really like the 'git send-email' feature > and can't get familiar with latest evolutions in opensource development > tools and work-flows. It seems others can't either. U-Boot tried to > implement gerrit [1] which would also be a drastic change in how to work > together. Finally this was stopped in favour of the old fashioned way. > > All I'd like to say is: Bryan, if you think going to github is a good idea, > please do so. But please also accept that at least some still want to send > their changes via mail. If going to github also means we kill the list, the > mail would finally end at your address. > > best regards > > Andreas Bießmann > > [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/173795 Lets look at some simple stats: Disclaimers: * emails not added to the stats for obvious reasons! * a few user names are duplicated because of bad commits with unbalanced quotations in the users name. I've done it a few times(6)... and gesh.. Yann did it 2511 times! :P :) * I have a no-nonsense, "matter of fact" attitude, and if you read too deep into what I'm saying, I may seem snarky and offending. If you're offended, then focus on the code and not my attitude. If you get mad at me for my attitude, I will ignore you and go back to code. The focus: Code * I don't like politics, it's the fast-path to my bad side. This is a community, not a congress. $ git shortlog -sn 2511 Yann E. MORIN" 50 Bryan Hundven 48 Benoît Thébaudeau" 40 Yann E. MORIN 32 Titus von Boxberg 26 Benoît THÉBAUDEAU" 15 Johannes Stezenbach 15 Zhenqiang Chen 14 David Holsgrove 11 Michael Hope 11 Titus von Boxberg" 10 Daniel Zimmermann 8 Anthony Foiani 8 Arnaud Lacombe 8 Joachim Nilsson 8 Thomas Petazzoni 7 Cody P Schafer 7 Esben Haabendal 7 Yann Diorcet 6 Bryan Hundven" 6 Martin Lund 6 Richard Strand 5 Bart van der Meulen 5 Bart vdr. Meulen 5 Cody Schafer 5 Florian Fainelli 5 Ray Donnelly 4 Fabian Freyer 4 Martin Lund" 4 Remy Bohmer 4 danielrubiob 3 Bart vdr Meulen 3 Daniel Price 3 Frederic Roussel 3 Frederic Roussel" 3 Jang, Bongseo 3 Robert P. J. DAY" 3 Samuel Martin" 3 Thomas De Schampheleire 2 Bernhard Walle 2 Ingmar Schraub 2 Jerzy Grzegorek" 2 Niels Penneman 2 Samuel Martin 2 Trevor Woerner 2 Zhuang Yuyao 1 Alexandre Belloni 1 Andreas Bießmann 1 Andrzej Bieniek" 1 Andy Gibbs" 1 Anton Leontiev 1 Antony Pavlov 1 Arnaud Vrac 1 Austin Morton 1 Blair Burtan 1 Bob Dunlop 1 Chih-Min Chao 1 Daniel Dittmann 1 Daniel Rubio Bonilla 1 Daniel Schultze 1 Darcy Watkins 1 Doug Kehn 1 Erik Inge Bolsø 1 Giammarco Zacheo 1 Heiko Zuerker 1 Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh" 1 Jason T. Masker 1 Javier Viguera 1 Jean-Marie Lemetayer 1 Jim F 1 Jon Ringle 1 Jonathan Liu 1 Jongsung Kim 1 Kalle Kankare 1 Kévin PETIT 1 Martin Guy 1 Matthieu Crapet 1 Nate Case 1 Oron Peled 1 Oron Peled" 1 Richard Braun 1 Simon Pasch 1 Solomon Peachy 1 Willy Tarreau 1 Yann Diorcet (diorcet yann 1 Zoltan Devai 1 blueness 1 convert-repo 1 goodmenlinux@gmail.com 1 harold 1 nyet Not trying to pull rank or anything, but... what you're saying is that all the people that have privately emailed me to thank me for moving to github (which have more historical commits then you have) should be negated by one person's desire to not use github? Trust me, if more people tell me to not move to github, then I will take it into account! So far, I have 1 for "No". I have both repositories (github.com and crosstool-ng.org) up, people are opening pull requests on github and sending patches via the mailing list, and I'm still applying both. So, really... Nothing has really changed. I'm currently not forcing either situation. So... Relax! :) :) :) The advantage to using github, solely, is to remove the burden of maintaining the infrastructure needed to host the repository, manage the patches to be applied/merged, the website, all while picking up the ability to track issues/bugs (that we currently do not have). I have other ideas and uses for the actual server everything is running on, so it is not going away any time soon. **** Now, to take a step back and compare the sample use-case of u-boot and gerrit that you brought up. I read the whole thread, and if you notice, it also wasn't a forced switch! Vadim setup a "SAMPLE" gerrit instance to test if it helped or hindered the development process for u-boot. Which it obviously did not fit their development process. U-boot's development process is much different the crosstool-NG's. Crosstool-NG has a mainline development process. Historically, after a release was cut, a branch was made to maintain that branched version (as per the goals of crosstool-NG). That has sort of fallen off since we converted from mercurial to git, but I plan on picking that piece back up. Also... No one has sent any patches for previous releases, so maybe it's not relative anymore... different topic of discussion. It's made up mostly of shell scripts and makefiles that in-turn build other tools into a toolchain. So I don't see this as "Software development" as much as I see it as "Scripting". But, we don't have any crazy branching in our development workflow. U-Boot has a mainline branch, but topics of development are done in "Topic Branches", and then merged into the mainline branch as they are approved. Then either those topic branches are removed, or rebased to master and continued. Their code base is largely C and Assembly, with a mix of other stuff to build and automate u-boot. It is widely more complex then crosstool-NG, and the development workflow is totally different. It's not surprising that gerrit did not work for them, since of all the non-android projects that have tried to use gerrit have reverted away from it. Gerrit does not work well with non-android projects. Gerrit becomes a gatekeeper for the development process, instead of just using git. You are required to install the gerrit command line tools, if you don't want to use the web interface. Getting everyone to change their workflow is not intuitive. Github != Gerrit Github does not get in the way of the development process. It's Just Git! (with some services around it, and some social stuff, which I don't care too much about) Github does not integrate with your google account. I personally am looking to move away from using my google account for my developmet tasks, but that's not part of this conversation. The only thing github does for us is set access control on who can commit directly to the repository, which I hope increases in time, as I don't want the project to depend on ONE person to keep the project going. It also does something we don't have which is to keep track of issues. Again, it shouldn't get in the way. You don't need any command tools, besides git. I've used github for quite some time, and I rarely need to use the web interface. I can handle most tasks from my email client (as I said, is changing for my development work) and my git client. You as a developer (non-maintainer) shouldn't need the web interface for anything but opening a pull request (which is just clicking one button) and making a new tree (which you probably won't do much if you just work in crosstool-NG). You can do all of your branching and everything else just as you normally would with your own git repository. I'm currently researching how we can integrate github and the mailing list. I don't want the mailing list to go away, and I'd like the ability for pull requests and changes to go back and forth to github from the mailing list and visa-versa. There is this whole service backend for github, and I'm sure there is a way to make this work! Research == Time. *** Now, I get that the review style changes a lot! It doesn't work the same way we have normally done changes on crosstool-ng and it is a MAJOR change! I am personally struggling with that change myself. So don't take what I'm writing personally! :) If you do, then I'm not going to take your issues personally, and will just ignore you and get back to code. I'm also learning to be a maintainer, by way of being thrown at the wolves. Hello! :D This email went out to the community to get *constructive* feedback. I am not interested in hearing: "This sucks. Don't do it!" << I will ignore this stuff (from here on out). Let's work on the constructive part, and I'm sure that if we work together, we can come up with compromises. Granted, if you still don't want to work with the community to come up with a compromise, you can always just fork the project and call it CrossAndreas-NG, and do what you want. YEAY GPL! :) *** I've been sectioning off this email with asterisks; Just guessing that you noticed :) In this section I'm going to re-word what I originally wrote this email about, and I'm looking for *constructive* feedback. We need to come together and figure out a workflow that we can all live with. Yes, github does things a little different. But what it does mostly is take a lot of server maintenance cruft off my back. Here is the github services api: https://github.com/github/github-services I'm sure there is stuff in there that we can use to make this work with our mailing list. Lets work together on this! Or... you can respond with "No". I will add it to the tally of "No"'s (currently 1), and if it is more then the number of contributors in the last year, I will reconsider. It's all based on the communities decision. Not only mine and not only yours. Cheers, -Bryan -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-09 12:15 ` Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-09 13:40 ` Tom Janson 2014-12-10 11:36 ` Andreas Bießmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Tom Janson @ 2014-12-09 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Hundven; +Cc: crossgcc maillist Hi, On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Bryan Hundven <bryanhundven@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm currently researching how we can integrate github and the mailing > list. I don't want the mailing list to go away, and I'd like the > ability for pull requests and changes to go back and forth to github > from the mailing list and visa-versa. There is this whole service > backend for github, and I'm sure there is a way to make this work! > Research == Time. How about a filtered email forward that sends the Github notifications to the mailing list? Not the prettiest solution, but I don’t see why it wouldn’t work. Could be either a dedicated “fake” user and email (a bot, so to speak), or e.g. your own, Bryan. Gmail makes it simple: The notifications have the form [repo].[user].github.com and Gmail even offers “Filter messages from this mailing list”. –TJ -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-09 12:15 ` Bryan Hundven 2014-12-09 13:40 ` Tom Janson @ 2014-12-10 11:36 ` Andreas Bießmann [not found] ` <CAPWKHJT3J04zRKaBG2JEmGBN4MdqOzpzhA+9zYUt8LEoRDwX=Q@mail.gmail.com> 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Andreas Bießmann @ 2014-12-10 11:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Hundven; +Cc: crossgcc maillist Dear Bryan, On 2014-12-09 13:15, Bryan Hundven wrote: > Andreas, > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:56 AM, Andreas Bießmann <andreas@biessmann.de> > wrote: >> Dear Bryan, >> >> On 2014-12-09 09:24, Bryan Hundven wrote: >>> >>> List, >>> >>> Prior to github, you'd 'git send-email' a change, it would be peer >>> reviewed here, and once approved, it was applied. >>> >>> Post github, you fork the repo, make a branch, commit your changes, >>> and approvals are done prior to merging the change. >> >> >> I personally dislike this change. I'll not get an github account just >> for >> adding changes to ct-ng. >> Maybe I'm a bit out-of-date, but I really like the 'git send-email' >> feature >> and can't get familiar with latest evolutions in opensource >> development >> tools and work-flows. It seems others can't either. U-Boot tried to >> implement gerrit [1] which would also be a drastic change in how to >> work >> together. Finally this was stopped in favour of the old fashioned way. >> >> All I'd like to say is: Bryan, if you think going to github is a good >> idea, >> please do so. But please also accept that at least some still want to >> send >> their changes via mail. If going to github also means we kill the >> list, the >> mail would finally end at your address. >> >> best regards >> >> Andreas Bießmann >> >> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/173795 > > Lets look at some simple stats: > > Disclaimers: > * emails not added to the stats for obvious reasons! > * a few user names are duplicated because of bad commits with > unbalanced quotations in the users name. I've done it a few > times(6)... and > gesh.. Yann did it 2511 times! :P :) > * I have a no-nonsense, "matter of fact" attitude, and if you read > too deep into what I'm > saying, I may seem snarky and offending. If you're offended, then > focus on > the code and not my attitude. If you get mad at me for my attitude, > I will > ignore you and go back to code. The focus: Code > * I don't like politics, it's the fast-path to my bad side. This is > a community, not a > congress. > > $ git shortlog -sn <snip shortlog showing me has just 1 commit> > Not trying to pull rank or anything, but... what you're saying is that > all the people that have privately emailed me to thank me for moving > to github (which have more historical commits then you have) should be > negated by one person's desire to not use github? No, that was not my intention. As I said in my first mail please do so, but _also_ accept others to still send patches by mail. > Trust me, if more people tell me to not move to github, then I will > take it into account! > So far, I have 1 for "No". > > I have both repositories (github.com and crosstool-ng.org) up, people > are opening pull requests on github and sending patches via the > mailing list, and I'm still applying both. So, really... Nothing has > really changed. I'm currently not forcing either situation. So... > Relax! :) :) :) No problem. Your statement was that 'prior github was "git send-email"', but 'post github there will be the need for pull requests'. Saying this, one could assume that some day no emailed patches will be accepted. You've proven above that I'm not really a tool-chain developer, that's true. But I'm a tool-chain user and have to build a new one from time to time. Fortunately ct-ng is somewhat stable and meet my needs, but sometimes (at least once) I also find a Bug and like to give the fix back to the community. For me it is way faster to build the fix and send the mail than get an github account, do the fork, push my branch and send the PR. Your shortlog above has shown a noticeably list of authors having just a few commits. I think they are also more ct-ng users than core developers. I assume that for those users the mail way is more efficient than the proposed way. But this remains to be proven ... And again, as long as the mail way is still available I see really no problem. > The advantage to using github, solely, is to remove the burden of > maintaining the infrastructure needed to host the repository, manage > the patches to be applied/merged, the website, all while picking up > the ability to track issues/bugs (that we currently do not have). That is reasonable ... > I > have other ideas and uses for the actual server everything is running > on, so it is not going away any time soon. May statement is, please keep it (the mail way to send patches) even longer ;) > **** > > Now, to take a step back and compare the sample use-case of u-boot and > gerrit that you brought up. > > I read the whole thread, and if you notice, it also wasn't a forced > switch! You are right. I took that example cause of the need for different workflow. Some where excited about the new approach while some other could not get familiar with the workflow required by this change. Here we have the suggested new workflow by sending pull requests for some self-maintained repository at github vs. patches via mail to the list. In an abstract way this is comparable. But you are right, if the majority of the core developers supporting the suggested workflow it must be implemented. That was not clear to me, cause there where no single response to your mail before. <snip detailed explanation why gerrit will not work for non android projects> > Github != Gerrit You are right. I brought that up cause of the change in workflow as mentioned above. > Github does not get in the way of the development process. It's Just > Git! (with some services around it, and some social stuff, which I > don't care too much about) But it misses a mailing list ... and therefore forces to use pull requests. > Github does not integrate with your google account. I personally am > looking to move away from using my google account for my developmet > tasks, but that's not part of this conversation. > > The only thing github does for us is set access control on who can > commit directly to the repository, which I hope increases in time, as > I don't want the project to depend on ONE person to keep the project > going. It also does something we don't have which is to keep track of > issues. I think point 1 could be achieved in another way too ... but having an issue tracker integrated in the SCM is a really good point. > Again, it shouldn't get in the way. You don't need any command tools, > besides git. I've used github for quite some time, and I rarely need > to use the web interface. I can handle most tasks from my email client > (as I said, is changing for my development work) and my git client. > You as a developer (non-maintainer) shouldn't need the web interface > for anything but opening a pull request (which is just clicking one > button) and making a new tree (which you probably won't do much if you > just work in crosstool-NG). You can do all of your branching and > everything else just as you normally would with your own git > repository. So having a repo outside github will also work? I do not have a github account and as said in my first mail do not plan to do so. > I'm currently researching how we can integrate github and the mailing > list. I don't want the mailing list to go away, and I'd like the > ability for pull requests and changes to go back and forth to github > from the mailing list and visa-versa. For me this is a new point. Your first mail does not show this position and I appreciate it. > There is this whole service > backend for github, and I'm sure there is a way to make this work! > Research == Time. > > *** > > Now, I get that the review style changes a lot! It doesn't work the > same way we have normally done changes on crosstool-ng and it is a > MAJOR change! I am personally struggling with that change myself. So > don't take what I'm writing personally! :) > If you do, then I'm not going to take your issues personally, and will > just ignore you and get back to code. Well, as stated above I'm far away from a core developer of ct-ng. At most I'm a user who provides patches from time to time. Maybe sometime I will do reviews too. Then I have to learn the way the community does this. No problem so far ;) Again, my statement was 'please do not shut down the ability to send patches via mail ever'. I will not (and as you showed above I'm far away from having that standing here to do so) force the core developers to use a specific workflow. > I'm also learning to be a maintainer, by way of being thrown at the > wolves. Hello! :D Hi ;) > This email went out to the community to get *constructive* feedback. I > am not interested in hearing: > > "This sucks. Don't do it!" << I will ignore this stuff (from here on > out). I think my sentence 'All I'd like to say is: Bryan, if you think going to github is a good idea, please do so. But please also accept that at least some still want to send their changes via mail.' was constructive, at least this was my intention. And as you have shown: The mail amount from me will not keep you busy continuously ;) > Let's work on the constructive part, and I'm sure that if we work > together, we can come up with compromises. > > Granted, if you still don't want to work with the community to come up > with a compromise, you can always just fork the project and call it > CrossAndreas-NG, and do what you want. YEAY GPL! :) I don't think this will happen ever ;) > *** > > I've been sectioning off this email with asterisks; Just guessing that > you noticed :) > In this section I'm going to re-word what I originally wrote this > email about, and I'm looking for *constructive* feedback. > > We need to come together and figure out a workflow that we can all > live with. Yes, github does things a little different. But what it > does mostly is take a lot of server maintenance cruft off my back. > Here is the github services api: > https://github.com/github/github-services > I'm sure there is stuff in there that we can use to make this work > with our mailing list. Lets work together on this! I'm sorry, but I don't think I have time to help here. I'm _not_ all against new stuff, but I'm busy with other stuff. Therefore my statement, please do not complicate the way rare users can support the community. > Or... you can respond with "No". I will add it to the tally of "No"'s > (currently 1), and if it is more then the number of contributors in > the last year, I will reconsider. It's all based on the communities > decision. Not only mine and not only yours. I appreciate your democratic attitude. As said multiple times before. I'm not at the position to force the ct-ng developers to use that workflow or another. All I'd like to say (and what I intended to say in my first mail) is: Please keep the traditional way to send patches via mail for those users of ct-ng which have improvements and like to support, at least a bit. As I understand your detailed explanation patches via mail will still be accepted. Is that true? best regards Andreas Bießmann -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <CAPWKHJT3J04zRKaBG2JEmGBN4MdqOzpzhA+9zYUt8LEoRDwX=Q@mail.gmail.com>]
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. [not found] ` <CAPWKHJT3J04zRKaBG2JEmGBN4MdqOzpzhA+9zYUt8LEoRDwX=Q@mail.gmail.com> @ 2014-12-10 13:34 ` Austin Morton 2014-12-10 16:59 ` ANDY KENNEDY 2014-12-16 2:46 ` Bryan Hundven 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Austin Morton @ 2014-12-10 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: crossgcc maillist Bryan, Another "1 commit" contributor here, so take me opinions with a grain of salt. I believe github is the best place for any open source community driven project, and commend you for moving in that direction. My experience sending a patch in via hg and the mailing list was less than fun. Back when this project still used hg I made a contribution, despite never using hg in my life. I had to setup hg on my machine along with the correct plugins to generate the emails for the mailing list. Ultimately it probably took me a few minutes with the help of Google. My point is this: every project has a different toolchain and steps required to contribute. This project is changing those requirements. The fact of the matter is, more people already have, use, and are familiar with github than not these days. It makes total sense to move in that direction. Of course, at the end of the day, if someone does send a patch in via the mailing list, Bryan could simply push it to a branch himself, open a pull request at github, and then direct any code review to the PR. Maintaining a mailing list for development as well as issue tracker will only serve to confuse and segment the community. In the end, it makes more sense to use the mailing list for user support/help and keep code review and other development "stuff" in github. At the end of the day, creating a github account takes 10 seconds, and you can then watch the ct-ng repo yourself in order to get email notifications about issues and pr's (WHICH YOU CAN DIRECTLY REPLY TO VIA EMAIL). This also allows people to control whether or not they get spammed with development "stuff" if they are only on the mailing list for support using ctng. TL;DR; github simplifies the process and lowers the bar for entry when contributing IMO, trying to keep both lines of communication (mailing list and gh issues) alive for development purposes will only stress out the maintainer and segment the community. Basically, I would try and convince as many people as you can to use github instead of the mailing list for code review and patch submission. It will make your life easier. Either jump into github with two feet, or not at all. Just my $0.02, Austin Morton -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-10 13:34 ` Austin Morton @ 2014-12-10 16:59 ` ANDY KENNEDY 2014-12-16 2:46 ` Bryan Hundven 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: ANDY KENNEDY @ 2014-12-10 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Austin Morton', crossgcc maillist > -----Original Message----- > From: crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:crossgcc-owner@sourceware.org] On Behalf Of Austin Morton > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 7:35 AM > To: crossgcc maillist > Subject: Re: github... need suggestions from you. > > Bryan, > > Another "1 commit" contributor here, so take me opinions with a grain of salt. > I got you beat: according to the e-mail I'm a 0 commit (though, I did have several patches that did get accepted into CT-NG???). I would rather (now) do the e-mail way as I am not completely familiar with git. I've been in the corporate world in which I have used various tools like SVN, CSV, StarTeam, and Perforce. git, though may be the BEST solution for OSS, is not something I've ever taken the time to (or been forced to) learn. diff -Naur a b > changes on the other hand, works GREAT for me! So, I’m in Addreas's camp on this one (but would support what Thomas suggested for the main-line, hard-core developers of CT-NG). My $0.04 (inflation :) ) Andy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-10 13:34 ` Austin Morton 2014-12-10 16:59 ` ANDY KENNEDY @ 2014-12-16 2:46 ` Bryan Hundven 2014-12-16 13:09 ` Carsten Schoenert 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-16 2:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Austin Morton; +Cc: crossgcc maillist Austin, On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:34 AM, Austin Morton <austinpmorton@gmail.com> wrote: > Bryan, > > Another "1 commit" contributor here, so take me opinions with a grain of salt. > > I believe github is the best place for any open source community > driven project, and commend you for moving in that direction. My > experience sending a patch in via hg and the mailing list was less > than fun. > > Back when this project still used hg I made a contribution, despite > never using hg in my life. I had to setup hg on my machine along with > the correct plugins to generate the emails for the mailing list. > Ultimately it probably took me a few minutes with the help of Google. > > My point is this: every project has a different toolchain and steps > required to contribute. This project is changing those requirements. > > The fact of the matter is, more people already have, use, and are > familiar with github than not these days. It makes total sense to move > in that direction. > > Of course, at the end of the day, if someone does send a patch in via > the mailing list, Bryan could simply push it to a branch himself, open > a pull request at github, and then direct any code review to the PR. > > Maintaining a mailing list for development as well as issue tracker > will only serve to confuse and segment the community. In the end, it > makes more sense to use the mailing list for user support/help and > keep code review and other development "stuff" in github. > > At the end of the day, creating a github account takes 10 seconds, and > you can then watch the ct-ng repo yourself in order to get email > notifications about issues and pr's (WHICH YOU CAN DIRECTLY REPLY TO > VIA EMAIL). This also allows people to control whether or not they get > spammed with development "stuff" if they are only on the mailing list > for support using ctng. > > TL;DR; github simplifies the process and lowers the bar for entry when > contributing IMO, trying to keep both lines of communication (mailing > list and gh issues) alive for development purposes will only stress > out the maintainer and segment the community. > > Basically, I would try and convince as many people as you can to use > github instead of the mailing list for code review and patch > submission. It will make your life easier. > > Either jump into github with two feet, or not at all. I feel exactly the same on this topic. For one, I'm a fairly busy person and tracking the mailing list is not my strong suit, although you can tell (by watching merges of pull requests and ability to track issues on github) that management via github is much simpler. With all due respect to Yann for starting this project and his ability to track the mailing list - there were many times when contributions were posted and passed without comments or being applied because of his busy schedule. If it wasn't for Yann, I (and many others) would not be here. Yann continues to provide guidance and development on crosstool-ng. I have no words to describe my gratitude to him, except that I need to order tickets to the next ELC in europe so that I can buy him and the free-electrons devs some beer and a few rounds of billiards! :D More so then those that contributed (first time committers or otherwise) are those that help out here on the mailing list! Those stats are harder to collect and the work those who provide support on this mailing list is in great debt! Many of those that have one or two commits have also contributed their time in helping others here. So my thanks respectively go out to them as well! With all that, I am still investigating a way to make this all co-exist, although I feel what Austin is saying here (cut from above): > Maintaining a mailing list for development as well as issue tracker > will only serve to confuse and segment the community. In the end, it > makes more sense to use the mailing list for user support/help and > keep code review and other development "stuff" in github. ...And I don't want that. I also see the mailing list (and the irc.freenode.net #crosstool-ng channel) as ways to get support for crosstool-ng, and general discussions and RFCs. The mailing list is called "CrossGCC", and isn't (and shouldn't be) specific to crosstool-ng. It is about discussion on creating cross compilers with gcc, in the general sense. I'm always happy to help people with using the new github workflow, so please ask if you need help! If patches are sent to the mailing list, I won't discard them. I will do what I can to get them in too! But review on the patches and issues with crosstool-ng need to be managed in github. I just started a new job, so things may not happen right away here at the end of this year/beginning of next, but after the dust settles I hope to have patchwork up to date and documentation updated in crosstool-ng. Cheers, -Bryan > > Just my $0.02, > > Austin Morton > > -- > For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq > -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-16 2:46 ` Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-16 13:09 ` Carsten Schoenert [not found] ` <CAPWKHJS9r0Db0Jdj-LBdmAk=m5kzypwvN6JGVmeMjOCg2mTjgw@mail.gmail.com> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Carsten Schoenert @ 2014-12-16 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw) To: crossgcc Hello, Am 16.12.2014 um 03:46 schrieb Bryan Hundven: >> Basically, I would try and convince as many people as you can to use >> github instead of the mailing list for code review and patch >> submission. It will make your life easier. >> >> Either jump into github with two feet, or not at all. > > I feel exactly the same on this topic. > > For one, I'm a fairly busy person and tracking the mailing list is not > my strong suit, although you can tell (by watching merges of pull > requests and ability to track issues on github) that management via > github is much simpler. I totally disagree here. I can't see a difference between the time needed by reading mails on a mailing list and a web UI, so that's no point for dropping the mailing list. So why should I change my work flow to browse through a web interface if I can do the same by reading my mails? And for me I can follow a well structured patchset via git-email better than on various web sites. Note there is more than the github service! > With all due respect to Yann for starting this project and his ability > to track the mailing list - there were many times when contributions > were posted and passed without comments or being applied because of > his busy schedule. If it wasn't for Yann, I (and many others) would > not be here. Yann continues to provide guidance and development on > crosstool-ng. I have no words to describe my gratitude to him, except > that I need to order tickets to the next ELC in europe so that I can > buy him and the free-electrons devs some beer and a few rounds of > billiards! :D Yes, it's up to the devs to track the ML or merge requests. But crosstool is also using patchwork which is great for not loosing any patches with the command line tool or the web UI itself. And discussions I also prefer to take via a classical mailing list. Every mailing list is a push service, but on the web interfaces it's up to you to get the infos. So no, I like the automatism to get a email if someone is writing something. [...] >> Maintaining a mailing list for development as well as issue tracker >> will only serve to confuse and segment the community. In the end, it >> makes more sense to use the mailing list for user support/help and >> keep code review and other development "stuff" in github. Definitive no! Why the hell only working on github? It's overkill especially for one-time committer to only accept the workflow via a github pull request. I won't do that! If it will happen I'm out a here. > ...And I don't want that. I also see the mailing list (and the > irc.freenode.net #crosstool-ng channel) as ways to get support for > crosstool-ng, and general discussions and RFCs. The mailing list is > called "CrossGCC", and isn't (and shouldn't be) specific to > crosstool-ng. It is about discussion on creating cross compilers with > gcc, in the general sense. Yes but that's the smallest part here. I haven't see any big discussion about creating cross compilers on the list in the last two years and there won't be any in the next two years. Around 60% of the traffic was coming from people with problems while running Yann's scripts, the other are mostly patches or discussions about the patches. So please keep the mailing list as it just is! It's a communication platform without the time pressure like on IRC Channels. -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <CAPWKHJS9r0Db0Jdj-LBdmAk=m5kzypwvN6JGVmeMjOCg2mTjgw@mail.gmail.com>]
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. [not found] ` <CAPWKHJS9r0Db0Jdj-LBdmAk=m5kzypwvN6JGVmeMjOCg2mTjgw@mail.gmail.com> @ 2014-12-16 16:02 ` Austin Morton 2014-12-16 16:33 ` Carsten Schoenert 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Austin Morton @ 2014-12-16 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Carsten Schoenert; +Cc: crossgcc maillist Resend due to plaintext failure.. Yet another reason mailing lists are terrible! On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Austin Morton <austinpmorton@gmail.com> wrote: > I would like to point out for a second time that if you create a github > account (which takes minimal effort) and watch the ct-ng repo from your > account you will receive email updates for issues and pull requests, > including all responses to the issue. You can reply to these emails just > like the mailing list and the responses will be included on the issue in > github. -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-16 16:02 ` Austin Morton @ 2014-12-16 16:33 ` Carsten Schoenert 2014-12-17 22:15 ` Bryan Hundven 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Carsten Schoenert @ 2014-12-16 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Austin Morton; +Cc: crossgcc maillist Am 16.12.2014 um 17:02 schrieb Austin Morton: > Resend due to plaintext failure.. Yet another reason mailing lists are terrible! No, if you use a typical MUA there is no problem at all. These WebUI are more terrible, but also this GMail interface can be configured to send non html mails! :) > On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Austin Morton <austinpmorton@gmail.com> wrote: >> I would like to point out for a second time that if you create a github >> account (which takes minimal effort) and watch the ct-ng repo from your >> account you will receive email updates for issues and pull requests, >> including all responses to the issue. You can reply to these emails just >> like the mailing list and the responses will be included on the issue in >> github. And I like to point out again, why should I do that if I simply want to provide a simple patch which I create more quickly like you logged in into your account. And you have considered there are places on earth there online bandwith are costs really money? So no, use Github if like but also respect the classical way with mail and mailing lists. Regards Carsten -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-16 16:33 ` Carsten Schoenert @ 2014-12-17 22:15 ` Bryan Hundven 2014-12-18 16:35 ` Harold Grovesteen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-17 22:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Carsten Schoenert; +Cc: Austin Morton, crossgcc maillist On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Carsten Schoenert <c.schoenert@gmail.com> wrote: > So no, use Github if like but also respect the > classical way with mail and mailing lists. This project is switching to github. I started this thread because I wanted help from the community on the "WORK FLOW" for working with github and mailing list. I've never said that the mailing list is going away, but I digressed when I mentioned that Austin is right about posting issues on the mailing list causing divergence from github issues. The reasons I moved us to github was: 1) ease infrastructure maintenance 2) provide a way to track issues/bugs Again, I started this thread for constructive conversation around this, but I've not gotten any, so I'm not going to respond to this thread and keep pushing forward with github. -Bryan -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: github... need suggestions from you. 2014-12-17 22:15 ` Bryan Hundven @ 2014-12-18 16:35 ` Harold Grovesteen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Harold Grovesteen @ 2014-12-18 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bryan Hundven; +Cc: Carsten Schoenert, Austin Morton, crossgcc maillist On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 14:15 -0800, Bryan Hundven wrote: > This project is switching to github. Excellent > > The reasons I moved us to github was: > 1) ease infrastructure maintenance > 2) provide a way to track issues/bugs Very valid and github addresses these issues. > > Again, I started this thread for constructive conversation around > this, but I've not gotten any, so I'm not going to respond to this > thread and keep pushing forward with github. > > -Bryan > I made a small contribution some time back, so really do not have an opinion about the work flow. I absolutely hate patches. However, I am a developer in another project, the Hercules emulator. The Hercules project switched to github a couple of years ago. One of the best decisions the project made. Yes, there was griping from the developers (and users). From a maintainer perspective this is a good decision. You will find even more things you can do with github, for example, hosting web pages, something the Hercules project does. I will only add from my experience that it takes some time for the work flow issues to get resolved. In the case of the Hercules project none of the developers were familiar with github so everyone had to go through a learning curve. As contributors get more familiar with it and its use with this project, work flow adjustments will naturally emerge. That is when the constructive conversation can really occur. Be patient and flexible moving forward. Change is rough for most of us. The "bumpy" ride is to be expected. Keep moving forward! Harold Grovesteen -- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-12-18 16:35 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2014-12-09 8:24 github... need suggestions from you Bryan Hundven 2014-12-09 10:02 ` Andreas Bießmann [not found] ` <0d794377584821026613224bfd6c4418@biessmann.de> 2014-12-09 12:15 ` Bryan Hundven 2014-12-09 13:40 ` Tom Janson 2014-12-10 11:36 ` Andreas Bießmann [not found] ` <CAPWKHJT3J04zRKaBG2JEmGBN4MdqOzpzhA+9zYUt8LEoRDwX=Q@mail.gmail.com> 2014-12-10 13:34 ` Austin Morton 2014-12-10 16:59 ` ANDY KENNEDY 2014-12-16 2:46 ` Bryan Hundven 2014-12-16 13:09 ` Carsten Schoenert [not found] ` <CAPWKHJS9r0Db0Jdj-LBdmAk=m5kzypwvN6JGVmeMjOCg2mTjgw@mail.gmail.com> 2014-12-16 16:02 ` Austin Morton 2014-12-16 16:33 ` Carsten Schoenert 2014-12-17 22:15 ` Bryan Hundven 2014-12-18 16:35 ` Harold Grovesteen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).