From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 25 19:01:51 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C6AD883; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:01:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com (mail-wg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAB6219D3; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:01:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id m15so4235413wgh.14 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:01:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=oMWeX45cfgkbEwUCovIDCHNwVFQQGlhC+Ut6V/gymko=; b=GBqv0CkS+ZdbA/p/o/IzuVuN6mmdcpNDY52xzUvOimr2qtRsWL/X4V78hrlP/K9xWj hPqBHmidf69aSkwjsEg142HzG6CnKLFhadTkTmUR6h+Ilh/4g/V/ZK4PNhXFqd2rSQEp 4+ptKfp8IZg0RpkUU+X6CtziJOPF+zhrSkwb6hHPRML7xwbQYTfoA9Xd3kXwyY8SB25X IrA28x5MSg7JPVruSor9hwURFTR67Gdo6B1Y4re4ybx08FUQVipgNNrbjQFMMP9Ih8NY ocIg3Aq8/rynnWA8Yh1uMPlFgEKZy5yw2jnTMYmYwc3//ibxs/vorMRCiZ65zPqCcP1d /Hjw== X-Received: by 10.194.57.140 with SMTP id i12mr10193979wjq.20.1390676508996; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:01:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from ithaqua.etoilebsd.net (ithaqua.etoilebsd.net. [37.59.37.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id k10sm11722721wjf.11.2014.01.25.11.01.47 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 25 Jan 2014 11:01:47 -0800 (PST) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 20:01:45 +0100 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Alfred Perlstein Subject: Re: What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays? Message-ID: <20140125190145.GE67763@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <52E2FA36.5080106@marino.st> <52E303CB.6020304@marino.st> <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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5oH/S/bF6lOfqCQb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52E4056F.6050307@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:01:51 -0000 --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--