What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays?
fernando.apesteguia at gmail.com
Tue Jan 28 16:13:39 UTC 2014
El 28/01/2014 16:04, "Daniel Siechniewicz" <daniel at nulldowntime.com>
> Just a little stick in this anthill:
> - I've seen a few people volunteering, but so far the reaction seems
> to be: "oh, yeah, well, ah, cool". I'd expect, with all the talk about
> how much they are needed, that they will be "snatched" immediately and
> coerced into doing unspeakable things (like processing a 100 PRs a
> day, ensuring high quality testing and all that :) ). I certainly hope
> this is happening behind the scenes.
> - Tools are abundant, focusing on github vs. aegis is really just
> highjacking this thread. If there's a need for new tool set I suppose
> people who actually USE the existing ones for ports will be able to
> identify what's needed FOR THEM. Some form of democracy, I guess.
> - Yes, fresh look is very important, but you can't tear down something
> without knowing the consequences, which pretty much means not without
> in depth knowledge of the existing mechanisms. Not everyone in this
> discussion seems to be coming from this perspective.
> - Absolutely, automate the shit out of the process, get rid of stale
> PR's (and ports, for that matter), "retire" inactive commiters, etc.
> But first and foremost, get some stats out of the system, there's no
> point throwing numbers like 50% this, 80% that, if you simply don't
> know. Measure, analyze and focus your attention where it gets the most
I wrote the same thing expecting someone to have a look at gnat's database
and collect some numbers
> - And stop petty squabbles.
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-ports