Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:30:40 +0100
From:      Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays?
Message-ID:  <20140125183040.GB67763@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
In-Reply-To: <52E40183.3090304@freebsd.org>
References:  <CAHcXP%2Bf6e-t--XbQPTH1goJp_CL7P=zTj5trZVWd4YZ_EsO9gw@mail.gmail.com> <52E2FA36.5080106@marino.st> <CAHcXP%2BfRDeKXjz0_sifgzeXC2dA-eDnoV5NH1yvF2D6R8JRmAg@mail.gmail.com> <52E303CB.6020304@marino.st> <CAHcXP%2Be9p2HrQ=M9HmPecMbWtXRuYPzH9kwfLGqgdrUrhvLuEA@mail.gmail.com> <52E30990.2060903@marino.st> <52E33AA7.3080205@freebsd.org> <20140125174835.GA67191@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <52E40183.3090304@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--TakKZr9L6Hm6aLOc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:25:07AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> On 1/25/14 9:48 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 08:16:39PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >>
> >> To me it would speak of tooling as opposed to anything.
> >>
> >> Does the ports system have a 1 or 2 click interface for merging PRs li=
ke
> >> for instance github?
> >>
> >> Could ports take PRs in the form of pull requests on github?
> >>
> >> Wouldn't that just turn the number of updates into a few minor clicks?
> >>
> >> (also wouldn't it make it easier for ports submitters)?
> >>
> >> (maybe there is some great ports system that I'm not aware of that mak=
es
> >> this all as easy github, but I somehow doubt that.)
> > That would imho be a total disaster, as less and less people will reall=
y take
> > care of reviewing the actual patch (lots of commits are already directl=
y from Pr
> > patches without applying some necessary diff for consistency, correctne=
ss, Q/A
> > and cosmetic.)
> >
> >
> You are not serious.
>=20
> You are saying that because the process would be too streamlined that=20
> quality would be impacted?
>=20
> That is pretty entertaining.  I've seen such positions, but only at very=
=20
> large and derpy companies coming from people invested in broken tooling.

I m saying that such tools as they are, are giving awful result, if we are =
ever
going to that can of direction, we will need to really take time to work on=
 the
workflow and the tools, to make sure this is done a proper way, and no gith=
un is
not doing such things a proper way, I did learn that the hardway with pkgng
developememt which is on github, I do not use anymorr at all their web tool=
s to
do any merge.
>=20
> > btw we already have tons of tools available to just merge patches direc=
tly from
> > gnats.
> Are any of these tools available on the other side?
>=20
> Ie, for port submitters?

yes porttools for example, or some scripts inside Tools/scripts=20

regards,
Bapt

--TakKZr9L6Hm6aLOc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAlLkAs8ACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Ex0yQCgwl17rBhZDkeDGkXiT5kK9hlI
uwcAniM9kLllfqQpcUXfoOIOIfl4fkFA
=9IXu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--TakKZr9L6Hm6aLOc--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140125183040.GB67763>