incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kelven Yang <kelven.y...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: Patches review
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2012 17:16:33 GMT
A patch management system is definitely very helpful, doing it in both places would be even
better. 

Kelven

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred Wittekind [mailto:rom@twister.dyndns.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Patches review
> 
> On 6/12/2012 4:01 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Alena Prokharchyk
> > <Alena.Prokharchyk@citrix.com> 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


Mime
View raw message