From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C805E1381F3 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 21:58:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9EBE1E09B5; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 21:58:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 107EFE09B5 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 21:58:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qe0-f49.google.com (mail-qe0-f49.google.com [209.85.128.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mattst88) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 272C933EFF3 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 21:58:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f49.google.com with SMTP id ff1so3540085qeb.36 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:58:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=2ALDCMuxngM1qFQkIt4LdWpaf4681D/1w3C8JHnzTJA=; b=argn6fIn4f8uSbTPABQS/vC+Z7PRHLF++x+GfqwYF5HXudKHmGO0+uREhp7jH9xcg3 7pYJqUyfOraDtOsfc57JG9k2+AM2CuBftanGKk3UzTBMSB175mlf9J81n2suhbbD5/0Z OKmNNeDhDP9bEEOylKbbzkh5r6LgQsN4YYwMgNDoDsRzGEdQ/MGJR/hUVds0l0DdsLZ0 3IMhNTb9PH4CxwjN1vxWw3gLcWKWBGgmZ0ag7OYJllRZygZjhXncHGz2b/wuhFykDSqg j1ud/g84z+cmiP2X7AYiHbf9khGFGse0lkxtOijxdCS8rwRHaaqrldPRSv7USb45vn1q +KRg== X-Received: by 10.49.51.167 with SMTP id l7mr10795797qeo.52.1381528722587; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:58:42 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.49.17.6 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:58:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1381525900.24205.87.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca> References: <1381513107-17483-1-git-send-email-baker.dylan.c@gmail.com> <1381515339.24205.73.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca> <1381525900.24205.87.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca> From: Matt Turner Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:58:22 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] [PATCH 1/4] catalyst: Specify python2 rather than the generic python To: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 5089722f-0c38-43e5-9b50-188d64e02b67 X-Archives-Hash: 9b889401f1b373b3c8eb85fc0a73b9a1 On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 12:28 -0700, Matt Turner wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > >> > This is only >> > good for running the code directly from the git checkout. >> >> actually seems useful. We've had clearly broken commits go upstream, >> and if the author had been able to test from a git checkout we >> probably could have avoided that. > > Which is why I made the rewrite code able to run from the checkout fully > and properly. Just cd into the directory, run "source ./testpath" and > it's will run completely from the checkout. > > >> What I mean is that I don't want to turn down contributions from new >> developers because there's a big backlog of work that hasn't gone >> upstream. >> > > I don't want to discourage others either. It is just much better to > encourage some help on the rewrite in my opinion. No, you should be moving patches that are reviewed and tested to master (which means rebasing on master and sending patches to the mailing list). > Especially since > patches 2 & 3 have already been done in the rewrite branch. Some of > patch 4 might have been done already, but likely not all. If the > rewrite is to take over from the master branch... > > The rewrite is not far from being able to take over as master. There > are a few rebase errors in the rewrite-on-master you did. There is some > cleanup work to do on the autoresume operation. Then a little more > testing with the tree defaults relocated to ensure I haven't missed any > hard coding. The development model on git is to make incremental changes that do not break things. I've been saying this for a while. The code needs to be reviewed as well. Maybe Dylan, who has been cleaning up a lot of python code in another project, would be willing to help review as well. > The default tree location move is waiting on the catalyst rewrite code > to go live producing stages, etc.. I'm exactly sure what this means, but I think you might mean something like renaming master to old-master and your branch to master. That's not the right way to do it, and that's not how git works.