directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <>
Subject Re: Considering rolling back
Date Sun, 30 Jan 2011 21:10:42 GMT
On 1/30/11 9:15 PM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
> -------------
> All the projects should now compile. I am going through all the tests now
> and will be re-applying Emmanuel's commits some of which were lost on a
> merge conflict. After Emmanuel's changes, I will fix some of the issues
> Stefan Seelmann discovered with the Control instances, and start making the
> tests work again.
> ------------------------
> It seems people want to rollback the recent changes. There's more time
> wasted on dealing with the complaints and ultimatums then solving the
> problem. Instead we should work together and finish this. I'm open to all
> suggestions.
There is no ultimatum. There is just a need for all the committers to 
benefit from a stable trunk, and if that means we branch, and revert in 
trunk, then it's probably the best move. We can't continue forever to 
work on a broken trunk, it's blocking everyone.

Now, that does not mean either that what have been done so far should be 
dropped. As Stefan proposed, it's just a matter to copy the current 
trunk in a branch, revert to some stable version in trunk, and continue 
fixing the branch until it's stable again. Then we can merge back the 
branch in trunk.
> Furthermore there should be no deadline imposed on anyone by anyone. Someone
> is telling me tonight or no go. Since when do we start bossing people around
> on this project? However I do understand this situation must improve soon
> and will roll back myself if need be. Reason should prevail not panic.
As soon as someone pushes a -1 on all the changes that broke trunk, the 
revert has to be done. And it's far more strong than an deadline. A 
deadline is really a limit fixed to avoid such a -1 to be pushed.

Anyone can -1 anyone commits assuming it's technically grounded, it's 
not "bossing people". And a broken trunk for a week is *technically* 
grounded. Giving some more time with a deadline is doing a favor to 
those who have broken the trunk, expecting them to fix it - or rollback 
- before a revert is requested.
> I am making progress but if others are worried then, any progress in *code*
> is no progress to the community. We have SVN and can go back to earlier
> states any time we choose.
> However can someone rationally inform me why we're so rushed?
Just because it's now one full week the trunk is unstable.
> Is a couple days going to make or break something I am unaware of?
> I spent a lot of energy on this and it will result in many positive
> consequences. However I am reluctant to continue if there will be social
> uneasiness. So I will keep trying fully dedicated to this and we can see
> where we are in the short term.
> If this is not salvageable, then we can just move the current trunks into
> branches, and place an older stable version of the trunk where trunk is
> now.
> There's no reason to get angry, or argue. A mistake was made doing something
> this big in the trunk. People are on it full time trying to fix it. There
> are ways to roll out too. We're not going to die here folks.
No, we aren't going to die. But there is also no reason to not be 
rational and continue further and further in a mistake. Branching as 
suggested by Seelmann is far to be unreasonable, and will just cost one 
or two hours of *one* person in the project, allowing all the others to 
go on.

We broke one rule, by breaking trunk. This breakage lasted way too long, 
probably because more changes than necessary were injected into trunk. 
The project is a big ship now, and changing one small part of it has 
impact on many other part, now think about what can happen when more 
than one change is done. I don't think it's too far pushing the ball to 
ask for some kind of stability between changes, and also some discussion 
to occur *before* injecting such changes into the code base.

I'm not lecturing anyone here. We all perfectly know a community is 
working. I just think that breaking such rules just introduces some 
breach between members in this community and this is not good.

Emmanuel L├ęcharny

View raw message