Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 20:42:41 +0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Let's adopt a standard nomenclature for webs of patch trees etc. Message-ID: <AANLkTim7MRUnV=_Ft8Z8BfjVYWASMHqdNEasQsa8ERA5@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20101226205033.GA4135@straylight.ringlet.net> References: <AED6562D-668E-455F-8204-C9A8F02B266D@cederstrand.dk> <201012261728.oBQHSK40032421@fire.js.berklix.net> <20101226204229.GS23098@acme.spoerlein.net> <20101226205033.GA4135@straylight.ringlet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It occasionally goes down. I/Bernard are sort of using it at the moment for our wireless hacking. I've not yet really had a shot at using it for collaborative work or trying to track -head, so I can't comment on that. Adrian On 27 December 2010 04:50, Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 09:42:29PM +0100, Ulrich Spörlein wrote: >> On Sun, 26.12.2010 at 18:28:20 +0100, Julian H. Stacey wrote: >> > Was Subject: Re: Schedule for releases >> > I changed it, as my reply takes it too far off that topic. >> > >> > Erik Cederstrand wrote: >> > > Hi Mike, >> > > Den 22/12/2010 kl. 18.45 skrev Mike Karels: >> > > >> > > > - Those of us doing backports could probably do a better job of >> > > > sharing the results. On the other hand, I'm generally backporting >> > > > to a specific release (currently 6.3 or 7.2) rather than -stable, >> > > > and we're testing our software rather than FreeBSD. >> > > >> > > Thanks for taking the time to write your comments. What strikes me is = >> > > that we may have lots of non-FreeBSD developers working to backport = >> > > stuff in their own private trees. Possibly a lot of redundant work is = >> > > being done. >> > > >> > > Even though you're backporting to a specific release, and even though = >> > > you're only testing the work via your own software, would it not help = >> > > others and possibly even yourself if this FreeBSD-specific work lands in = >> > > the FreeBSD repository instead of your private tree? In my view you're = >> > > just as much a FreeBSD developer as people with commit access that are = >> > > scratching their own itches in CURRENT. >> > > >> > > Erik= >> > >> > Good point, Probably loads of fixes from non commiters never get >> > sent back to FreeBSD. Many people will have motivation only to fix local >> > problems, but no time to send back, especially deterred by clunky send-pr. >> > >> > Though I & many others have sent lots of send-pr, >> > contributing even a spelling correction to FreeBSD >> > is much harder than to eg http://wikipedia.org >> > >> > + a beginner has to bend their brain to send-pr >> > >> > + send-pr user should not be burdened exploring tree to find >> > Maintainer to send-pr CC (which should be automaticly >> > extracted from tree on a ports =MAINTAINER basis >> > or eg a src/ .MAINTAINER per some sub directories >> > where there is a volunteer or mail list) >> > >> > + send-pr user must spend time composing a >> > diplomatic & attractive subject & body, to catch >> > some gnats@ readers eye, to get them to stop browsing >> > get interested, & commit. >> > >> > Many a potential contributor's attitude will be: I don't >> > have time: Catch the diff or drop it, your loss ! >> > >> > So a lot of potential send-pr won't get filed, but I bet local users >> > don't toss their fixes though, but keep local patch kits, till if >> > ever they or others send-pr & something gets commited, (which might >> > be days or years later). >> > >> > Those diff trees stored localy, users could easily export via >> > rdist/rsync etc to their local webs, eg I do this: >> > My diffs in a tree structure >> > http://berklix.com/~jhs/src/bsd/fixes/FreeBSD >> > My application script >> > http://berklix.com/~jhs/bin/.csh/customise >> > >> > Those trees, FreeBSD could encourage users to keep in a standard >> > format (path nomenclature etc) & we should reccomend, >> > indexed from a common page on eg wiki.freebsd.org >> > >> > It would make a search tool &/or automatic periodic indexing >> > for possible diffs so much better than any general purpose >> > search engine. >> > >> > Index of uncommited patches ready for test, would be ideal >> > for those currently stuck, & would assist more motivated >> > testers corroborating good patches worth commiting. >> > >> > A standard format would increase chances patch kits are found, >> > even if patch creator too busy to file send-pr etc. >> > >> > Let's adopt standards to make searches for potential patch trees easier: >> > - Adopt a common path root & nomenclature for all our trees of local diffs, >> > - Ask users to mirror local uncommited trees of diffs to thir local webs >> > (until if when commited after send-pr, then they delete) >> > - Ask authors of local patch kits to submit a single URL to a new wiki page, >> > pointing to top automatically apply-able directory of patches >> > >> > Later we might also list a SOC project for a crawler indexer, >> > - src/ directories could also Optionaly later adopt >> > .MAINTAINER files (Subject of previous discussions, please dont let that >> > distract from main proposal though) >> > - ports/*/*/Makefile MAINTAINER = could also be used by a SOC tool >> >> While this idea is good as a base, doing this with patch-trees is the >> worst possible move. Patchfiles lack comments or 'commit info' and they >> do not easily record the revision and branch they should be applied to. >> >> Stacking multiple patches together with comments on what they do, is >> exactly what revision control systems were made for. And while we cannot >> easily share svn access to random contributors, systems like git or >> mercurial are exactly what we need here. >> >> In other words, we need github for FreeBSD. I'm working on some basics >> for this at repos.freebsd.your.org, but had severe VM instabilities >> during the last weeks. > > I have to admit that this crossed my mind as soon as I read Julian's > e-mail, especially as I've been keeping my local FreeBSD patches in > a version-controlled tree for the past ten years - first CVS, then > Subversion, and recently Git. > > Now, is there a reason we couldn't just use Gitorious? :) > > G'luck, > Peter > > -- > Peter Pentchev roam@space.bg roam@ringlet.net roam@FreeBSD.org > PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc > Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 > If the meanings of 'true' and 'false' were switched, then this sentence wouldn't be false. > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > > iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJNF6qVAAoJEGUe77AlJ98TeacQAJQEVJJqR/3Lrx/ksypGOgLL > sL8PR8bPEHxur6IBanpmhGuDidxym9xhj/VSsxqAiAEIiOKfX1tsE+fOLcA7Ygtg > pusQTfhJD4KOCS86aFucXGL0r2gAEKkPUyJAwfORiZSaQsDjfVWKClEvZQNuBEOv > wk4DeeZsPcKBJCTDiplF/MJLTLgPTHQT30Xjsq2Ci9/f2atqD630v+GicywRo1Ha > jx9BF4wOF4o/1+XImB/eRWy8ZGAoHAwiFioFQwWSncEVbTPbnrHhiOZGBs2Ad57S > iaD+qEDRrD+Pc/fOcrHEKxE6frk1dskl9TOYUGWXh/XOhrCA4B0I+J8Q7elTCsrB > FFrsO2OTZOzWwTzSF/zLMsx8jAA/Flk7N86Fz5mf566P0GMn4dd/XR6oZXbAMasy > FJOPi7SllmQeVwLERwwQgxKCVIUB2ofYN+76jMxM11qbpXlBD5wipMV/nOAULrSg > vvj2Mi4d4aunUPy8J2AOYfc3RpqPRmDALXGz+g2ExFii2qN6qYxvrrxUa3PZHIu1 > N1d5yZM5Mm0NoiJJtQOlSi51NKydL5wcNvpPKg4XWJXz3H7b+4fNXKY/D4O+lkBr > jhC9OvWV3vzx/ME34GVjJAP3LT7E1ArWz0kyGQYEU5jzthPJd27L7vO+ftLJziVA > yQRepT6Dh6BtD6SdIFCQ > =o6Cb > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTim7MRUnV=_Ft8Z8BfjVYWASMHqdNEasQsa8ERA5>