From owner-freebsd-git@freebsd.org Wed Mar 1 12:16:56 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-git@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 677E8CF27DE for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:16:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r@robakdesign.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42CF1E47 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:16:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r@robakdesign.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 3EE47CF27DB; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:16:56 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: git@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E8C7CF27DA for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:16:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r@robakdesign.com) Received: from mail-vk0-f52.google.com (mail-vk0-f52.google.com [209.85.213.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F21D7E45 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:16:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r@robakdesign.com) Received: by mail-vk0-f52.google.com with SMTP id x75so7887178vke.2 for ; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 04:16:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ywX04CiBmlhXUUv/OkPnrF0JjJvxD+7/B+iXil6XMCQ=; b=jxhE6qtpRrAyX2mLYXm+M158cQCrNZ1jU6gZZRRfdEay+i7Kj/Kb8v+nIYg/UFgp5e 0zDuf/ivtzhXGsapIw2wFFcl7hIMcooUSmi/bEegsvRgqo5mNbQzOaal/BCe1m+ie/Rs EXQMvu8+mEW2bHmDu4pZX2lbAdsgUf8q1TBXD2ESj4OiYiumBx1EuL9Ql/0wiaCiTfXE Obd8R5cno1stD90PD/ks2DjnJZU7uHsUa1xBIN0A8ZPz6pXnOeZoG05W+2auIergg6RD N0SBDikGKfnLScQzk5NvSs6EL9QNDaPmO3TlUCi4R9Z4vcs5sTKgJ9a/LE4/2nClvxZ6 PKEg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39n5Yt2UaCpuVWReXcFG0gkzH/f6K/cfPtrf+8v7lQ4Qw0hqssUU/Ecj10cYwf0q7g== X-Received: by 10.31.166.7 with SMTP id p7mr172525vke.136.1488370608609; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ua0-f179.google.com (mail-ua0-f179.google.com. [209.85.217.179]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d78sm46287vke.18.2017.03.01.04.16.48 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Mar 2017 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua0-f179.google.com with SMTP id q7so8875566uaf.2 for ; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.176.69.5 with SMTP id r5mr3905694uar.56.1488370608001; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 04:16:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.11.6 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 04:16:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5D8FF3CD-422C-489A-B009-454CA1031E5E@FreeBSD.org> References: <5D8FF3CD-422C-489A-B009-454CA1031E5E@FreeBSD.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Bart=C5=82omiej_Rutkowski?= Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 12:16:27 +0000 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: pull requests To: Kristof Provost Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Bart=C5=82omiej_Rutkowski?= , Warner Losh , git@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-git@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of git use in the FreeBSD project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 12:16:56 -0000 On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 1 Mar 2017, at 13:00, Bart=C5=82omiej Rutkowski wrote: > >> Don't get me wrong, I am simply trying to understand what exactly would >> that accomplish - see https://reviews.freebsd.org/D9649. Lets, for a fun >> thought experiment, imagine it was an GH pull request that was transferr= ed >> to Phabric. What now? 2 weeks passed and nothing happened. Would any >> policy >> fix that? >> >> No, the best policy in the world isn=E2=80=99t going to fix lack of time= . > > It might help a little if these at least all land on the same pile, but > it=E2=80=99s > not going to magic up reviewers. I=E2=80=99m not sure anything would. > > A possibly policy answer would be that reviews are automatically closed > after a > while. It=E2=80=99s not great, but at least the submitter knows that noth= ing is > going > to happen. Leaving it open forever also accomplishes nothing. > Well, have you seen Bugzilla recently, or ever? :) We've THOUSANDS open PR's (literally, ~2300 for ports, ~6800 for src, with oldest ones going back as far as to 2001). Does it make any sense to waste time to write such policies for Phabric but not for Bugzilla? And if you're about to write one for both, good luck convincing people that bugs shouldn't just lay around forever 'just in case'... In any case, if you'd happen to me successful with that, I'd support it. While 'just in case' argument makes some sense, I still think that keeping more PR's open than we can really handle causes cognitive load and discouragement in taking care of them just by sheer looking at the number of PR's. Kind regards, Bartek Rutkowski