cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Fred Wittekind <>
Subject Re: Patches review
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2012 12:59:30 GMT
On 6/12/2012 4:01 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
> <> wrote:
>> I know it's been discussed in several email threads, but I would like to
>> initiate a separate discussion on what tool we should use for reviweing
>> the patches.
>> Several people (including myself - using Outlook on Mac OS X Lion) have
>> been struggling already with applying email patches using "git am". Some
>> patches appear to be broken, email file import/save is different in
>> various email clients, etc. But the main disadvantage - there is no other
>> way to track patch flow history rather than gathering email by subject.
>> For instance, I would like to see the patch history in some centralized
>> place:
>> * when patch was created
>> * who picked up the patch for the review and when
>> * what was fixed after first, second,...n review
>> * when the patch was merged to the mainstream.
>> I think we should start using the official tool for that -
>> Gerrit/Reviewboard/etc.
>> Please follow up with your suggestions and preferences.
>> -Alena.
> Thanks for starting this - I have a thrice rewritten mail sitting in
> my drafts folder around this subject. Quick followup to voice some of
> my frustrations.
> We have a process today - and for a number of folks that has worked
> very well. I personally find it dead easy to grab patches from github
> (though our mirroring is currently non-functional since we have made
> the move to the ASF. ). There's also a certain class of folks that
> have have sent patches via email that were also easy to apply.
> However, a number of folks are sitting behind servers or services that
> actively break patches which has led to much gnashing of teeth here.
> While I don't care so much about MUA issues, I do desperately despise
> seeing MTAs breaking patches - and I spent around 4 hours last night
> trying to unbreak patches from 3 different developers that their MTA
> (all different) had made completely unusable.
> Where this really disturbs me is the barrier to participation. Working
> on CloudStack is a pretty large barrier to begin with. You have to
> understand the facet of CloudStack that you are working on, and then
> understand git.
> While many of us can work via email - and some of us (me included)
> even prefer it, I do worry about what the net effect is now that we
> say - git patches submitted this way are actively broken by exchange,
> appear to be broken by gmail, etc. I suppose we could push folks to
> use some external mail service that behaves properly, but it seems
> like an artificial barrier, and one that is largely out of the control
> of folks wishing to collaborate with us.
> I think there are potentially benefits to using some tool other than
> email down the road as well such as being able to have $test_suite run
> against any patch before a committer even gets to review it.
> Thoughts, comments, flames?
> --David
Personally, I've always submitted patches via attaching them to bug
reports.  Works well when I find a bug in something, don't have time to
wait on anyone else to fix it, so I fix it myself, attach it to a bug
report, and hope it's in the next release so I don't have to deal with
it again.  Works pretty good with most open source projects.

Fred Wittekind

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message