From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Fri Jun 1 15:27:32 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1CF4F710E1 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 15:27:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from srs0=obct=it=sigsegv.be=kristof@codepro.be) Received: from venus.codepro.be (venus.codepro.be [IPv6:2a01:4f8:162:1127::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.codepro.be", Issuer "Gandi Standard SSL CA 2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AA8081E2B for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 15:27:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from srs0=obct=it=sigsegv.be=kristof@codepro.be) Received: from [192.168.228.1] (d5152df30.static.telenet.be [81.82.223.48]) (Authenticated sender: kp) by venus.codepro.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 14C6844ED3; Fri, 1 Jun 2018 17:27:30 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sigsegv.be; s=mail; t=1527866850; bh=XDHZ9filEPz8ycFG2hpryk5rHTRbxi9vEC0avbi6REU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=IdOf8n+4aWiTL9yGceT00h6b8qf/BIDgTKdPZzkc+dqa4ajbjvmjZSyOQ0ENJAu7H a8FjTDEZrFgS61HuS5nhHjJfLDqhB/QWqPPn8OiS7azAZna1Zfe/EXZPGKPajACAQC 62MvGYx3ggBbIyE5pL1ICddWu/KsmHixvmW3ZoP4= From: "Kristof Provost" To: "Warner Losh" Cc: "Bob Bishop" , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, "Poul-Henning Kamp" , "Dieter BSD" Subject: Re: PRs are being closed for bogus reasons :-( Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 17:27:28 +0200 X-Mailer: MailMate (2.0BETAr6113) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <1407.1527801278@critter.freebsd.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 15:27:32 -0000 On 1 Jun 2018, at 17:09, Warner Losh wrote: > On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 8:53 AM, wrote: >>> On 1 Jun 2018, at 15:41, Warner Losh wrote: >> The sad truth is that only about 10-15% of them have comitable >> patches in >> them when submitted. And that number decays over time as things age >> in >> bugzilla. [etc] >> >> Sure. But the best a non-comitter can do is to supply a patch tested >> against HEAD. If the patch rots because it hasn’t been committed >> six months >> down the line it’s not my fault. >> > > Well, not quite true. I've had several people send me pointers to bugs > over > the years and engage me when I tell them that the patch isn't quite > right. > That conversation is easier, to my mind, in Phabricator, though. > There's no > substitute for making good connections and motivating volunteers to > want to > help you. That gives much better results than filing and forgetting > and > hoping for the best. As a committer, I find it a low return on > investment > to go looking at random PRs. I find it a much higher return on > investment > when I have a history with someone (even a short one). > > Fixing this broken state of affairs is not going to be easy... > This is also true for bug reports with no patches attached to them. Bug reports with more information, more reports from people affected by the same bug, simplified test cases, follow-up with confirmation that other versions are affected too and so on are more likely to attract attention. For better or worse, the fact is that both patches and bug reports fare better if their submitter actively advocates for them. I don’t mean to suggest that it is somehow the fault of the submitter if bugs don’t get fixed. Instead I want to point at this as something people can do to help, even if they don’t have commit access, or even if they don't know how to read or write code. Regards, Kristof