On 08/09/2012 12:17 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 11:37:10AM -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote:
On 08/09/2012 11:13 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
* bugzilla / gerrit integration (Bjoern)
+ concern about getting spammed a lot from calc guys.x
+ postpone discussion for next week.
Just to voice my opinion, I too would be reluctant to see this
integration. We core devs already receive tons of mails from
bugzilla many of which are pretty much noise. And I'm personally
not very fond of this type of automatic messages cluttering bugzilla
comments.
The proposal is to send a comment to bugzilla for the _first_ upload of a patch
to gerrit. That is _one_ comment per bug maximum. So not much clutter there. In fact,
if we do not automate this, people might do it manually in 90% of the time,
leaving you with both some extra noise _and_ uncertainty if there is a patch
lurking on gerrit. Worst scenario of all.
Sure, but gerrit already spams the mailing list. I don't see the need
to duplicate that in bugzilla.
I'm also equally concerned about fragmenting our discussion
platforms. Even without gerrit, splitting the discussion between the
mailing list and bugzilla was (to me) hard enough. Adding gerrit to
the mix will make matters worse. I would rather we encourage
everyone to keep the discussions on the mailing list, instead of
splitting it in now three different platforms, and adding lots of
noisy automatic linking between them.
If there is anything that is cluttered its the mailing lists.
Yes, and I want to keep the cluttering just to the mailing list. Why do
we have to also clutter bugzilla in addition?
The review
traffic there is largely discouraging non-core developers who just cant follow
it as is and arent invested enough to do sophisticated mail-filtering. Just
sending out the gerrit account notification, I noted that there are a lot of
volunteers using foo+libreoffice@example.com addresses. That is _not_ a good
sign about the current state of our communication.
Yes, but this will also increase stress on core developers too. I know
we are in for encouraging more developers, but not at the expense of
stressing the existing developers. We need to balance that somehow.
If the target is to declutter communication, moving patch reviewal to gerrit is
the best option as it allows more targeted communication (e.g. notification on
of the interested reviewers).
So, I have to be honest. I'm still not entirely sold on gerrit, and my
passion for gerrit is not as great as some of the others who are totally
sold. I just try to remain neutral and want to see how this plays out
first before making more drastic changes. But I can't help feeling that
we are starting to push this a little too fast too quick.
Kohei
--
Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.