On Mon, May 28, 2018, at 19:55, Marcel Hollerbach wrote: > Hello, > > D6224, D6223, D6222 are fixing the issue. (Or at least the cases i have > seen). > > However, could you stop acting up like this & writing mails like this? > The lifetime of eo objects have been quite a mess, this branch brought a > bit light into the dark, it was not perfect how it came, sure, however > here it is. Further more, you claim that this is not personal, why was > it then not enough to create a ticket, or simply a revert revision to > discuss things? Doing patches in EFL had always a team flavor for me, > mails like this are destroying that feeling. So in the end: Could we > stop this stupid blame team and start to act as a team again?
Introducing non-bisectable commits as a part of a batch *is* very bad though. If a commit does not compile/work individually, it should be squashed into another, interactive rebase exists for a reason and should be used before every big batch push. :) Otherwise, it will just result in a pain when trying to find breakages later. D5 > > Greetings, > bu5hm4n > > On 05/27/2018 06:39 PM, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > On Sun, 27 May 2018 08:23:49 -0500 Stephen Houston <smhousto...@gmail.com> > > said: > > > >> Okay this is certainly not ideal, but try not to over react here calling > >> everything horrible and somehow deducing something crazy like not reviewing > >> patches is somehow better than reviewing patches. Let's give Cedric a > >> chance to clean it up. > > > > i spent hours bisecting and out of 15+ commits i tried to compile only 1 > > compiled and worked at all. a bit under a half didn't even compile. every > > other one led to e instantly segving on startup without even starting the > > compositor, e hanging in infinite loops in destructors within seconds of > > usage. i call it horrible because the batch is unbisectable. that means that > > the quality of the actual series is pretty bad as it seemingly was not > > tested > > due to so much of it not working in various ways. > > > > but don't worry. i'm giving cedric a chance to clean it up. why do you > > think i > > said i'm waiting until mid-week? it's going to probably take me a bit to > > revert > > all the patches too and maybe find conflicts, so i'm not going to go do that > > work if it isn't necessary. as of next friday i won't have time for about 2 > > weeks, so it's done by next thursday or not done for a long time. i did > > clearly > > explain that and since it's really hard to find the issues, if they aren't > > fixed > > quickly they have to be rolled back because it'll be probably months of > > broken > > efl until maybe it's eventually found. it may be weeks if we are lucky, but > > that kisses goodbye to the efl release schedule stefan has been informing us > > about. i don't want to go revert things because i find it fun. i do not. i > > do > > it because it's necessary. > > > > also today i have seen a string of people on email/irc complaining things > > are > > broken. this is seemingly incredibly common that it's broken. i would love > > to > > see it fixed, but i can't find out what in this mountain of 100+ commits > > did it > > as it's impossible to bisect. :( i spent the hours trying because my first > > port > > of call was to try and fix the issues first. so let's see if it gets fixed. > > > >> On Sun, May 27, 2018, 3:55 AM Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> i've been dreading updating e1fl for the past few days. the dread proved > >>> founded. the short version: > >>> > >>> the batch below is pretty horrible. it leaves enlightenment glitching with > >>> garbage windows after a desktop switch or a second or 2. it makes > >>> enlightenment's restarts significantly slower (like from 1 second on this > >>> machine to like 2-3) with more visual bi-products (screen with just > >>> wallpaper > >>> visible for 0.5-1sec). the batch is also essentially unbisectable. > >>> > >>> this batch leaves efl in a far worse state than before. > >>> > >>> the batch itself is horrible because of the unbisectability. i have tried > >>> now > >>> about 15 commits (i lost count as i ended up in text console unable to > >>> write > >>> notes where i was writing them) and out of them only 1 compiled and ran at > >>> all > >>> without major issues. the largest amount of these just left e crashing on > >>> startup along with another group having edje_cc crash during compilation. > >>> while > >>> the crashes were gone by the end of the batch the above issues (short > >>> version > >>> above) remain. > >>> > >>> finding out the causes of these issues is nigh impossible. i've already > >>> spent > >>> over 4hrs on the above trying to find them. > >>> > >>> so... i've gone back to 0090384ef5ac9f9e939874a1bbf233298c9db930 which is > >>> good/works. i'm sitting on this (and i suggest anyone else do the same for > >>> now). > >>> > >>> i'm going to wait until my wednesday morning here in seoul. if the above > >>> issues > >>> are not fixed by then i have no choice but to revert every patch from > >>> 36f8a70041a8a16249a07d5b7131d57a8a6ea95b to > >>> 75bb7c049f05176aef635bddcfb320c306b196bf from cedric because tbh - this is > >>> the > >>> problem batch as described. it's not personal. it's the reality of the > >>> situation. i have to do this because there is no way an efl release can go > >>> out > >>> with these in place in their current condition. this is 115 commits btw... > >>> so > >>> going over every single one to figure out what may or may not be involved > >>> is > >>> going to be a major time sink that i don't think can be done well other > >>> than > >>> maybe trim the start of this series and keep some of those. i might do so > >>> in > >>> the meantime. > >>> > >>> i'm a bit disappointed on the lack of testing of these. :( also this is a > >>> perfect example of drive-by commit batches causing major issues which is > >>> why i > >>> keep pushing against branches or hoarding of commits because they lead to > >>> this > >>> again and again. it also reinforces my take that work needs to be done in > >>> small > >>> units and shared frequently and i am certain the more and more common > >>> issues > >>> efl etc. are having is a result of the change to branches and hoarding of > >>> patches and dumping them in large numbers. review doesn't work because i > >>> already reverted one patch earlier today that was reviewed that totally > >>> broke > >>> e. review obviously doesn't involve any testing and that is the most basic > >>> thing to do. :( > >>> > >>> -- > >>> ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- > >>> Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > >>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> enlightenment-devel mailing list > >>> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > >>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > >> _______________________________________________ > >> enlightenment-devel mailing list > >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > >> > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
