From nobody Sun Jul 21 20:08:16 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-current@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4WRvcG0bylz5QQ2W for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2024 20:08:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-pj1-x102c.google.com (mail-pj1-x102c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "WR4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4WRvcD6kjQz4CN2 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2024 20:08:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-pj1-x102c.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2cd34c8c588so332129a91.0 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2024 13:08:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1721592508; x=1722197308; darn=freebsd.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=w3jqzkYASHVmArNZlpQC/v2x0lzr+d77kNJCImbf6kY=; b=jQZiGsZODR8mXbIWgkIIv5fDF4PgBSc1BTWQG7UMs1jO+gFdyxKgbKBpMuQXH48Rd5 Mo5I2fQJ7EThIXf4dK+Y7DAC97oxaXg7YZo3IUQ956cSVXp7knSHGjydMKLrPYNBsLPB vv+L63F/2LBpagw/H9DLQvH//p4YOQrHkJ+3VywRfoefOsg8OV0stDtdAk+zjx9uU/v5 eVQH8g36lkK1UUxvESijnKVZ2EXEnzrFHmXu42NlyXKQr3z2iKZesaOI7zkk4SPuz96Q Z1z4180mbMgSZEwQOKRrEgAHGdKkuIvEswlhhvEkFPNPmz5TJxe32TUF3zwE4O6favmp T/EA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1721592508; x=1722197308; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=w3jqzkYASHVmArNZlpQC/v2x0lzr+d77kNJCImbf6kY=; b=ol5qMBQudgULu/GVrYSd7mcZbp9ZAuqJiK27GjdbD3SNA7LbnABgWox+5eBsx7hFVn 0XD4OoUs8lw4d4yfm3D+rBBd00HYsWXNP82qf4vJRAkeDwSHzoxYXAeF+o726gJXklj4 yhEor+AYTOrmfhhZz3Ro7taHKRJBxuz3OxQrGYb6JKYcwWTstcMUR8wPmOaTQMa5f6Ax yxH4s52XOrlK6NDMOMnqCaU1SI7znMAKcH1oOKrOhCM8eDxFFI6zgOveLIyMiL4cDYHM fqnTXpyUEWY56uR78r9pPn4RKE+yqzNGPiu+MZPeocXLghGc8f8pWizDLquRbbGYas9E n1dQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwR9ZJZECoV51fHNRcr2qLSELmA+tcALd3hy0UhT/ivgG52rHwM XCNwGFwohvW2OtsAVTj6RFAp6DMxxbK5XFPmiOjVtBKowIUY4eIQLutTDgWVYRgF8ivqr0oZzU5 X1giW3XZRY9YLRFxQxesBSbXnAp0mPwpYhxaZll+VYMuJeOzEvd4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFMD8eoS9bof8MpXNCkGvu9T3KCG/kZn/b3qPQ/C4ncFyCN7kFEpuSvj9pD0c01mQsSNz2G+8fyyaEE8yHagQU= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:33d0:b0:2c9:6f06:8009 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2cd273f16f3mr1825424a91.1.1721592507580; Sun, 21 Jul 2024 13:08:27 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-current List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 14:08:16 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Long time outdated jemalloc To: cglogic Cc: FreeBSD CURRENT Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000dce06e061dc77d17" X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4WRvcD6kjQz4CN2 --000000000000dce06e061dc77d17 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 2:03=E2=80=AFPM cglogic wr= ote: > > On Sunday, July 21st, 2024 at 6:54 AM, Warner Losh wrote= : > > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 1:59=E2=80=AFAM cglogic = wrote: > >> Hello FreeBSD community, >> >> After Jason Evans stepped aside from maintaining jemalloc in FreeBSD, >> it's not updating in time anymore. >> Version 5.3.0 was released May 6, 2022 and FreeBSD still not imported it >> into the tree. >> >> There is a pending review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D41421 from Aug >> 11, 2023. >> I'm successfully running FreeBSD/amd64 system with D41421 applied for 8 >> months, as well as many other people. >> >> Can it be reviewed and committed to CURRENT? >> Or, if there is no committers willing to do it, can commit bit be given >> to submitter or another person willing to do this? >> >> It's very disappointing when users spend their time to fill such gaps an= d >> their efforts just ignored by the developers. >> Every year FreeBSD Community Survey asking about user experience in >> contributing to FreeBSD. >> Here you can see an example of such contributing. >> >> > First, thank you for being persistent and continuing to bring it up. It's > important to do that to make sure this (and your many other) contribution > doesn't fall on the floor. > > And to be fair, we're only 3 months since the last update. Still, quite a > bit longer than you should have to wait, but not nearly the year the > original date suggests. > > And this is a perfect storm of "how the project is bad at accepting > contributions": > (1) The original submission was close to the 14 branch creation time. Thi= s > meant that we weren't well prepared to look at it since it is such an > invasive change (at least on its surface). It also slowed the initial > response... > (2) There was a number of back and forth requests for changes, which took > time to sort out... > (3) The size of this is huge, well beyond the capacity of Phabricator to > review accurately... > (4) It's a vendor import. That means we can't just drop the Phabricator > review into the tree... > (5) It's phabricator: this is a great tool for developers, but we have a > terrible track record of using it for intake from new contributors. We > don't have any oversight at all over this tool, at there's at best tepid > and luke warm attempts to look for drop balls. > > All of these things are a terrible experience. I can only apologize. Thes= e > days, we might steer this towards github, but the 'vendor import' means y= ou > really need someone on the inside, or you need to be on the inside to mak= e > that work. > > So, how to move forward? Well, I'd like to propose the following: > (1) submit all the other Phabricator reviews you have open (they are > mostly good, or close to good) to github. Github is being actively manage= d > and will make it faster to get things it. It's a much better tool for new > contributors (and even frequent contributors of smallish things). > (2) I should do an vendor import of 5.3.0 from github, and do the merge t= o > a branch and push that to github. You can then layer on your changes and > those can be reviewed more closely as a pull request against the branch I > push. I suspect that most of the issues are sorted out already > (3) I'll land it via that route... > > And, if the sum of the other pull requests and this are good (and I > suspect they will be), then we can talk about commit bits and such. > > It's experiences like this which is why I'm trying to stand up github pul= l > requests as a reliable way to get things and and the best place to send > people... > > Thanks again for persisting, and also for expressing this criticism that > we (hopefully) can use to make it better. > > Warner > > > Hello. > > I'm not the author of D41421. Just applied the patch to test it 8 months > ago. And recently discovered that it's still not committed. > I can't copy your message to Phabricator because don't have an account. P= lease, > if you have time, help the author in D41421. > Ah yes. I've been in touch with the author for other things, and somehow thought it was you.... I'll reach out to him via other means... Warner --000000000000dce06e061dc77d17 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 2:03=E2=80=AF= PM cglogic <cglogic@protonmail= .com> wrote:

On Sunday, July 21st, 2024 at 6:54 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:


On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 1= :59=E2=80=AFAM cglogic <cglogic@protonmail.com= > wrote:
Hello FreeBSD community,

After Jason Evans stepped aside from = maintaining jemalloc in FreeBSD, it's not updating in time anymore.
Version 5.3.0 was released = May 6, 2022 and FreeBSD still not imported it into the tree.

There is a pending review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D41421 from Aug 11, 2023.
I'm succes= sfully running FreeBSD/amd64 system with D41421 applied for 8 months, as we= ll as many other people.

= Can it be reviewed and committed to CURRENT?
Or, if there is no committe= rs willing to do it, can commit bit be given to submitter or another person= willing to do this?
=
It's very disappointing when users spend their time to fi= ll such gaps and their efforts just ignored by the developers.
Every year FreeBSD Community Survey asking about user experience in contr= ibuting to FreeBSD.
Here you can see an example of su= ch contributing.


Firs= t, thank you for being persistent and continuing to bring it up. It's i= mportant to do that to make sure this (and your many other) contribution do= esn't fall on the floor.

And to be fair, w= e're only 3 months since the last update. Still, quite a bit longer tha= n you should have to wait, but not nearly the year the original date sugges= ts.

And this is a perfect storm of "how t= he project is bad at accepting contributions":
(1) The origi= nal submission was close to the 14 branch creation time. This meant that we= weren't well prepared to look at it since it is such an invasive chang= e (at least on its surface). It also slowed the initial response...
(2) There was a number of back and forth requests for changes, which= took time to sort out...
(3) The size of this is huge, well beyo= nd the capacity of Phabricator to review accurately...
(4) It'= ;s a vendor import. That means we can't just drop the Phabricator revie= w into the tree...
(5) It's phabricator: this is a great tool= for developers, but we have a terrible track record of using it for intake= from new contributors. We don't have any oversight at all over this to= ol, at there's at best tepid and luke warm attempts to look for drop ba= lls.

All of these things are a terrible experience= . I can only apologize. These days, we might steer this towards github, but= the 'vendor import' means you really need someone on the inside, o= r you need to be on the inside to make that work.

= So, how to move forward? Well, I'd like to propose the following:
=
(1) submit all the other Phabricator reviews you have open (they are m= ostly good, or close to good) to github. Github is being actively managed a= nd will make it faster to get things it. It's a much better tool for ne= w contributors (and even frequent contributors of smallish things).
(2) I should do an vendor import of 5.3.0 from github, and do the merge = to a branch and push that to github. You can then layer on your changes and= those can be reviewed more closely as a pull request against the branch I = push. I suspect that most of the issues are sorted out already
(3) I'll land it via that route...

And, if = the sum of the other pull requests and this are good (and I suspect they wi= ll be), then we can talk about commit bits and such.

It's experiences like this which is why I'm trying to stand up g= ithub pull requests as a reliable way to get things and and the best place = to send people...

Thanks again for persistin= g, and also for expressing this criticism that we (hopefully) can use to ma= ke it better.

Warner

Hello.

I'm not the author of= =C2=A0D41421. Just applied the patch to test it 8 months ago. And rec= ently discovered that it's still not committed.
I can't copy your message to Phabricator= because don't have an account.=C2=A0Please, if you have time, h= elp the author in=C2=A0D41421.

Ah yes= . I've been in touch with the author for other things, and somehow thou= ght it was you....=C2=A0 I'll reach out to him via other means...
=

Warner
--000000000000dce06e061dc77d17--