Hi. 2020-07-23 5:17 UTC+02:00, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>: > If we request the pipeline template plugin to be installed, that would help > reduce the amount of boilerplate needed in the new Jenkins. I could help > with that.
I don't know what part of this discussion this is a follow-up to, but I for sure would give preference to tools controlled by the Apache infrastructure team. Gilles > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 22:00 Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 2020-07-23 3:35 UTC+02:00, Torsten Curdt <tcu...@vafer.org>: >> >> >> >> > I realize that a local build seems to be your gold standard. >> >> >> >> Not mine. "Commons". >> >> >> > >> > You are arguing for it. >> >> No I'm not. It (i.e "maven", "svn" then "git") was there >> when I came here. >> >> It could change but that's another discussion that >> will probably never happen as people just assume >> that everyone should use GitHub on its own (as >> contrasted to through being an Apache committer). >> [The latter is the main thing I don't agree with.] >> >> > I would just call it a current policy or practice. >> > >> > >> > >> >> > That's a very debatable point of view. >> >> >> >> There was no debate. >> > >> > >> > Yet it is a debatable point of view :) >> > >> >> No problem with automating the release process. >> [Cf. my comments in other threads on that subject.] >> >> > >> >> I don't see why you are putting those sideways >> >> conclusions into the simple issue of maintaining >> >> this place comfortable for everyone, not only >> >> for GitHub users. >> >> >> > >> > And I don't get why you are making such a big deal about having to >> > delete >> > 100(?) emails and maybe setting up an email filter. >> >> Yesterday 0 >> Today 100 >> Tomorrow ? >> >> And for what? Delete. >> I don't get the logic. >> >> >> Deleting the messages should have been 10s max. >> >> > I wonder why you choose to be outraged instead. >> >> >> >> No, today's flood just pushed me to want to have >> >> something that's bothering for months, fixed. >> >> >> > >> > The flood was from enabling the bot. >> > So what has bothered you before? >> > The mails about PRs? >> >> Yes, all those messages that would go in [TRACE] level >> in a logger. >> >> >> I guess there are many people out there that like it as a tool. >> >> >> >> Maybe you could explain why it's a burden for you? >> >> >> >> Sure: No GH account. >> >> >> > >> > OK - why don't you have one? >> >> Why should I? >> Do I need one to contribute here? I so, where is stated? >> >> > And why does that make things harder? >> >> It does when changes to the contribution work flow >> assumes that everyone has one. >> [I mentioned that 2 or 3 times already on "dev@". >> Namely that it is factually as if "dev@" and JIRA are >> not anymore *the* (only) official places where changes >> to the codes are discussed.] >> >> >> so maybe elaborate on >> >> > the inconvenience. >> >> >> >> Try to do something on GH without being logged in. >> >> >> > >> > So others are using a tool that (I assume) you don't want to use, >> > and that is causing inconvenience for you and that is bothering you? >> >> The inconvenience is the invalid assumption that everyone >> should use GH even though that was never discussed. >> >> > And you want the rest of us to not use the tool because of that? >> >> Where did you get that conclusion from? >> >> Is GH more than a convenience tool like Travis, Coveralls or >> SonarQube? >> Or is it a core part of the work flow like "git"? >> If so, when did this happen? Where is the decision recorded? >> >> Gilles >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
