Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
Cc: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Commit reviews
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:00:10
Message-Id: b41005390710152049v4a66186bt27f73940bb5a1c36@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-project] Commit reviews by Steve Long
On 10/15/07, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
> Doug Goldstein wrote: > > Alec Warner wrote: > >> On 10/15/07, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@g.o> wrote: > >>> Jonathan Adamczewski wrote: > >>>> Doug Goldstein wrote: > >>>>> That's what this commits review list feels like. > >>>>> > >>>> Nearly every suggestion (from Donnie and others) has been over some > >>>> issue that relates directly to either correctness or maintainability. > >>>> It doesn't matter if you can "rattle off capabilities to a millimeter" > >>>> - if they're not documented somewhere (like, say, in the comments of > >>>> the ebuild) then the maintainer that comes after you gets to go and > >>>> break it all over again. > >>>> > >>> Correctness? Fine. Go ahead. Stick $(use_enable xvmc) into the ebuild. > >>> Do it. I dare you. Then try to compile. > >>> > >>> Guess what? When it blows up... that's called INcorrect. The opposite of > >>> the right thing. > >>> > >>> The maintainer who comes after me would be someone with a experience > >>> with the package. Some bumkin isn't going to come to maintain package > >>> XYZ unless they know or use the package, and guess what? That means > >>> experience. > >> > >> I think this assumption is false. People maintain packages they don't > >> know the intricate details of all the time. You are of course, free > >> to ignore any and all suggestions offered; but you are not allowed to > >> silence them. > >> > >> -Alec > >> > > I must have not received my silence/moderate remote control for the > > Gentoo mailing lists. Since I haven't received it, I clearly can't > > silence anyone on the mailing lists. > > > Since we're not discussing the technical content any more, but whether the > commit reviews should happen at all, I thought i'd bring this to the > project list. Please don't take that as criticism: I appreciate many of > your peers see "take it to project" as an insult, but it's actually a good > thing: you have more latitude to discuss what's annoying you. > > > I still stand by my original feeling that we'd better the community NOT > > only the developers doing the commits by updating the devmanual, which > > is accessible to all developers and all users in the Gentoo community. > > In addition to updating and cleaning up repoman checks, which is a tool > > that everyone in the community can use. This is versus individual > > examples in random ebuilds in random e-mails that all have almost an > > identical subject on the mailing list. > > > I agree the devmanual and repoman should be updated, but not that the > reviews shouldn't happen. For a start it's interesting to see the ins and > outs of ebuilds we'd never otherwise look at, and it's even more > interesting to see the stuff that causes an issue, eg an upstream configure > script that can't take spaces in prefix. > > If the reviews bother you, you can surely set a procmail filter which only > allows your ones through? > > > The commits review is flawed because if we're not documenting this stuff > > in one central place, then when new developers join. The same lessons > > have to be learned over and over again. > > > Sure, so file a patch to devmanual for stuff that's missing? Or just tell us > the rough details here and it can be discussed before some of us lowly > users file a patch.
I have a checkout of the devmanual and I'm working on adding some bits. Patches are always welcome, the source is at http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/devmanual/ or svn co http://anonsvn.gentoo.org/repositories/devmanual or for developers: svn co svn+ssh://user@××××××××××.org:/var/svnroot/devmanual
> > > Then again, this depends on the QA guys actually doing something about > > the outstanding bugs. > Well there'll be an awful lot less bugs hitting user systems now that every > ebuild is reviewed and errors are brought to the list, I'd imagine. After > all, peer review (or the fear of it ;) is what makes Open-source software > such high-quality. > > Is there a specific area you feel QA is falling down on? If so, please tell > the community, and maybe we can help. I know several users who take > pleasure in fixing bugs (and don't want the hassle of being a dev) and many > more discuss a bug on the forums (often one they've found) before filing a > patch. > > > -- > gentoo-project@g.o mailing list > >
-- gentoo-project@g.o mailing list