From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca (simark.ca [158.69.221.121]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB82E3858D35; Tue, 23 Apr 2024 03:12:42 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org CB82E3858D35 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=simark.ca Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=simark.ca ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org CB82E3858D35 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=158.69.221.121 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1713841965; cv=none; b=kz33rWuuGqUhLs3scTc+LSbP7xtJdqA/vs9jFH/Hx3fccsEzBZAeBJIPmpnh2/65Rk44hmZ6Of84O/VF45W1vxgW5s+fxmmVWn4qIQX/DEvQ+h3jc/kE4RJuO+JlRjOLzBsFi+kP0QaK/v3yWiMGGlSwgYaLRAi9y0Bjitd99NY= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1713841965; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gkeCeG61OsEjMPuZ63qHGcqvAVtohTVqw2y9hzFLYrE=; h=DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From; b=fVmI8L4kcEW9j4Y4WuP+HmdDYuXS0PnZsXyDxxwfg2QIV2yCDdEWUdAJfn6ACg7bF8jGYTe6pfJpo5/uNdEwAiLULfeDPWNjvLVdv1Ie/7umuBkWPwSiP1wjDQ1VeLX8MKJnnfUm/f4E2JImR7++Nyqy3JSADKrPkLpSrl5x2W4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=simark.ca; s=mail; t=1713841962; bh=gkeCeG61OsEjMPuZ63qHGcqvAVtohTVqw2y9hzFLYrE=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=KjGhRBkxVDADorZvrdHGp91uLoTSOIIbh3uNKM30JE2xKAwZqA2AINteabj9JAHf6 887i3NBP9CiOBN+j+oE3urJUFA5HLVMf0avO1uv/qlk71qvTOhPpk1ghWETfwCuyRE bTJ980jF26H51pMHItpcN5DbvPj8tVGZbwssFZjU= Received: from [10.0.0.11] (modemcable238.237-201-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.201.237.238]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A526E1E030; Mon, 22 Apr 2024 23:12:41 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4499703f-7500-4c05-bd2b-46964f7dd561@simark.ca> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 23:12:41 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Updated Sourceware infrastructure plans To: Overseers mailing list , Tom Tromey Cc: Jason Merrill , Joseph Myers , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org, Mark Wielaard , binutils@sourceware.org References: <20240417232725.GC25080@gnu.wildebeest.org> <20240418173726.GD9069@redhat.com> <87v849qudy.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Simon Marchi In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 2024-04-22 22:55, Jason Merrill via Overseers wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 11:42 AM Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>>>> "Frank" == Frank Ch Eigler writes: >> >>>> [...] I suggest that a basic principle for such a system is that it >>>> should be *easy* to obtain and maintain a local copy of the history >>>> of all pull requests. That includes all versions of a pull request, >>>> if it gets rebased, and all versions of comments, if the system >>>> allows editing comments. A system that uses git as the source of >>>> truth for all the pull request data and has refs [...] >> >> Frank> Do you know of a system with these characteristics? >> >> Based on: >> >> >> https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/dev-design.html#_notedb >> >> ... it sounds like this is what gerrit does. >> > > Someone mentioned earlier that gerrit was previously tried unsuccessfully. > I think this is a common pattern in GCC at least: someone has an idea for a > workflow improvement, and gets it working, but it isn't widely adopted. I > think this is a problem with the "if you build it he will come" model > rather than with any particular technology; people are more or less > comfortable with their current workflow and uninclined to experiment with > someone else's new thing, even if it could eventually be a big improvement. Agreed. Gerrit has many nice features, but using it would require doing some compromises over some things that some community members consider very important. Would have to give up some things we take for granted today, such as being able to interact 100% by email. But staying with the current way of working because we can't find another way of working that checks 100% of the checkboxes also has an opportunity cost. I doubt we'll ever find a system that checks absolutely all the checkboxes, but that doesn't mean that the current system is the best. > I think that the office hours, for both sourceware and the toolchain, offer > a better path for building enthusiasm about a new direction. As someone who pushed to try Gerrit back then, I'd be happy to chat at the next office hours (if you remind me). > Is gerrit still installed? Hum yes actually, you can check `gnutoolchain-gerrit dot osci dot io`. But it should really be taken down, it's not responsible to leave an unattended outdated web service like that. Simon