From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 31 09:25:43 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@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 0C7AAE18; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:25:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D57A52099; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:25:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.21] (unknown [130.255.19.191]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C6B143BA8; Thu, 31 Jul 2014 04:25:22 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <53DA0B71.7090502@marino.st> Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 11:25:05 +0200 From: John Marino Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Dokuchaev Subject: Re: svn commit: r363524 - in head/emulators/pearpc: . files References: <201407302302.s6UN2GCn094189@svn.freebsd.org> <20140731060809.GA20983@FreeBSD.org> <53D9E30D.3030902@marino.st> <20140731065333.GA39915@FreeBSD.org> <53DA0037.1060809@marino.st> <20140731090807.GA81522@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20140731090807.GA81522@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Roman Bogorodskiy , ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 09:25:43 -0000 On 7/31/2014 11:08, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:37:11AM +0200, John Marino wrote: >> And --- we have have a huge backlog on the PRs. the time is better >> spent getting through PRs 3, 6 even 12 months old rather than burning it >> all on one 10-year unmaintained port. Let's use what limited volunteer >> time we have wisely, and let users submit new PRs if there's a run issue >> (which indicates the port is actually used as well). > > Fair enough. I just hope that in strive for closed PR numbers we won't > lower the quality of what we commit (as opposed to what's usually being > submitted). The quality of what gets committed has been steadily increasing. swills' jenkins has been working as a safety net, so qa errors are getting caught where they were not before, and people are using poudriere and redports before committing too. from this POV, everything is working better than ever. The PR backlog is a big deal. There is a lot of bad feeling from the users about having PRs stagnate, weeks, months, even years. With bugzilla in place the trend has reversed and the PR numbers are lowering, but they are still way to high. Right now we have over 50 "patch-ready" PRs that committers could pick up and commit easily. The PR situation is not good. Moveover, unstaged ports like pearpc are going to be deleted in 4 weeks* so staging PRs are very important. When we get the PR backlog to between 500-800 PRs then maybe the PR situation will be considered ok and quality can be more in focus, but right now definition quantity is more important with the clock ticking. More committers should be taking on staging and fix/breakage PRs right now (update PRs and new ports are less priority IMO) John * at least eligible for deletion