On 06/03/15 11:12, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 27 May 2015 at 21:06, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 05/27/15 20:55, Carsey, Jaben wrote: >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Andrew Fish [mailto:af...@apple.com] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 11:49 AM >>>> To: Justen, Jordan L >>>> Cc: Bruce Cran; edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Olivier Martin >>>> Subject: Re: [edk2] Replacement EDK2 email list coming soon >>>> >>>> >>>>> On May 27, 2015, at 11:21 AM, Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 2015-05-27 10:20:09, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >>>>>> On 05/27/15 18:06, Andrew Fish wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On May 27, 2015, at 1:52 AM, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com >>>>>>>> <mailto:ler...@redhat.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Access on the web looks like a step forward (eg. it provides syntax >>>>>>>> highlighting), but it's actually a small step at a steep price. The >>>>>>>> price is that a web browser (and a central server) are required. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> “Stone Knives and bearskins” aside, why is a web browser bad? >>>>>> >>>>>> Ultimately, I can only say that I've found web apps very limiting >>>>>> when engaging in technical discussion. >>>>> >>>>> See also: this thread right here. >>>>> >>>>> ... Actual discussion happening. Can you imagine trying to do the same >>>>> on a web forum? >>>>> >>>>> ... Little barrier to entry to the discussion. (An email account.) >>>>> >>>> >>>> I did not think a web browser was a barrier to entry, hence “Stone Knives >>>> and >>>> bearskins” Star Trek quote. >>>> >>>> In my proposal I tried to position the web browser as adding value (visual >>>> diff >>>> for free, applies patch for free, auto builder for free), not being a >>>> required >>>> workflow. >>>> >>>>> I happen to agree with Laszlo. We should retain the ability for people >>>>> to run git format-patch/send-email to contribute. >>>>> >>>>> If we adopt some web based system, we should note that we are going to >>>>> cut some people out of that loop. >>>>> >>>>> I've seen Gerrit a little, but I've not actually worked with it. >>>>> Regarding what I saw, I wasn't particularly impressed (nor concerned). >>>>> It didn't appear to bring all that much beyond email reviews. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I’m not tied to Gerrit. If we add an auto builder, then the review becomes >>>> more than send a patch to the mailing list. I’d be fine if that was an >>>> automated mailing list that did the auto build, if that passes post to the >>>> edk2 >>>> mailing list and maybe have some quick way to do a graphical diff. Maybe >>>> that is not possible. >>> >>> Graphical diff is frequently much more useful than the email. Often I need >>> more surrounding code than the email has. >> >> I agree 100% (as I explained. Probably with too many words.) >> >> The solution is, IMHO, not to move to a web app, but to make it very >> easy for reviewers to apply / fetch the patch series onto / into their >> local clones. This way the entire *tree* is at the reviewer's disposal, >> at any stage in the series, and not just for review, but for building >> and testing as well. Diffs can be displayed with everyone's favorite tool. >> >> More context than that simply doesn't exist. >> > > Something like patchwork/pwclient perhaps? > > http://jk.ozlabs.org/projects/patchwork/ > > It is currently being used by a number of Linux kernel subsystem > maintainers, but it is entirely optional for contributors: it is > basically just a custom view onto the mailing list feed, with some > additional metadata to keep track of the acceptance state of patches.
I consider patchwork (a) primarily a maintainer tool (for tracking pending patches, tags from others etc), (b) secondarily a reviewer coordination tool -- sometimes people are looking for stuff to review, and giving them subject lines and (more importantly) Message-Ids is effective. (The review still happens on the list.) Laszlo > > >>> >>>> >>>> I think what we are saying is a new way to review patches is not worth >>>> changing the current workflow. If we got an auto builder, or for me a quick >>>> way to look at patches with out having to apply them, then maybe changing >>>> the work flow is worth it. I’m fine with doing all the feedback on the >>>> mailing >>>> list. >>> >>> Email based feedback works well so far as I can tell. >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Andrew Fish >>>> >>>>> -Jordan >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> edk2-devel mailing list >>>> edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> edk2-devel mailing list >>> edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> edk2-devel mailing list >> edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > edk2-devel mailing list > edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
