From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 25 22:44:15 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 56780BBE for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 22:44:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-x229.google.com (mail-pa0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24A0C1ECA for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 22:44:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id fa1so4586720pad.28 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 14:44:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=8UlmkKns0Wwj1xaNcj0nSZ/uLoCPfh0PjKSqoLrn2Bs=; b=iExMxIQJrd4LY8kiyB7rY906xsWdO4TP7ugDhy4YZkcsnfjmnq2JrJSqqH44IoWcJX fD7SKXp38A9H6leGBKY+rqWbq+wsjS+cbC7Go7e+XLsSMxXg1c7e84D01WP3mtVpj5Cp JD4kWJ4ZXYHaYoEnLwnh/tSNnBz5MXN9WOZNNw2kWQOhGPrSsLwCZGYFTd5/2poNC0LO SHyn/xg80N8vIdJq/5LidvlWm9f9TMMR0Jsc3V0MUXYbME8o9i75guHT6/y9f1D7j+FD nPGiHz3Tx7ZLXUlWPJwFesxqFuzwaY5/gSO5bdvEsO4VcJsVSdY+UaCeH1TmcqNpkjp5 8LSA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.220.198 with SMTP id py6mr21751890pac.21.1390689854817; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 14:44:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.155.38 with HTTP; Sat, 25 Jan 2014 14:44:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52E43A80.4030501@rawbw.com> References: <52E43A80.4030501@rawbw.com> Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 17:44:14 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays? From: Aryeh Friedman To: Yuri Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bernhard_Fr=F6hlich?= , Big Lebowski , ports 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 22:44:15 -0000 On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Yuri wrote: > On 01/25/2014 05:43, Bernhard Fr=F6hlich wrote: > >> With the scripts it should be possible to fetch the patch of a PR, apply >> and commit it to your redports repository and do additional changes unti= l >> you are okay with it. What is still missing is a script that helps >> committing the changes to the FreeBSD tree but it's really not that >> complicated to write that. >> > > This sounds like a very manual process again. Today it is already manual. > This only automates the patching step. > > > be more specific and name the problem, if you mentioned it? >> >> The raised concerns were that automatic build testing might result in le= ss >> testing on committer side. I agree that this might happen and automatic >> build testing is only one part of what committers need to do. A huge >> backlog and no response for months is definitely nothing we want. >> > > But what exactly do committers test that can't be automated? Automatic > system could install the port with dependencies into the blank > installation, check syntax correctness, run 'lint' on it, verify that it > installs/uninstalls cleanly and doesn't leave residue, etc etc. What is > beyond that? > I am trying to understand, what would the general ports expert without th= e > intimate knowledge of this particular package catch, that automated syste= m > won't be able to catch? > The key seems to be that no one has time to do the stuff they really want to do (get new ports into the system)... to that end automating everything that can be automated is sure help free up comitter time so they can look at what is interesting > > Yuri > --=20 Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org