Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 20:01:45 +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: <20140125190145.GE67763@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <52E4056F.6050307@freebsd.org> References: <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> <20140125183040.GB67763@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <52E4056F.6050307@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--5oH/S/bF6lOfqCQb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:41:51AM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > On 1/25/14 10:30 AM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > 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 like > >>>> 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 makes > >>>> this all as easy github, but I somehow doubt that.) > >>> That would imho be a total disaster, as less and less people will really take > >>> care of reviewing the actual patch (lots of commits are already directly from Pr > >>> patches without applying some necessary diff for consistency, correctness, Q/A > >>> and cosmetic.) > >>> > >>> > >> You are not serious. > >> > >> You are saying that because the process would be too streamlined that > >> quality would be impacted? > >> > >> That is pretty entertaining. I've seen such positions, but only at very > >> 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 githun 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 tools to > > do any merge. > >>> btw we already have tons of tools available to just merge patches directly from > >>> gnats. > >> Are any of these tools available on the other side? > >> > >> Ie, for port submitters? > > yes porttools for example, or some scripts inside Tools/scripts > > > > regards, > > Bapt > Is there a primer on using these tools? I don t know I uses none of them, but one can write one, volunteering? regards, Bapt --5oH/S/bF6lOfqCQb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlLkChkACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Ey2XQCgkUqeE1QvR/8fH2a/SCufufcr JVUAoIF8yZNYg8pwyICYGZIGIWvdrOPa =jh9I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5oH/S/bF6lOfqCQb--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140125190145.GE67763>