On Tue, 29 May 2018 00:41:44 +0200 Daniel Kolesa <dan...@octaforge.org> said:

> 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.

that was precisely my point. i had made it in multiple mails now. i spent hours
in the hope of narrowing down what caused it so i could inspect just that commit
and being unable to because of this. that is why i call it horrible. if it's 2
or 4 patches - ok. not great. 10 - not god. 100+ like this? horrible is the
word i use.

> If a commit does not compile/work individually, it should be squashed into

well yes and no. this leads to bigger commits thus harder to figure out what in
that commit did what. see below about testing, which is what i think should
have happened but apparently didn't over 100+ commits. (well the fact i could
build + run only one of them that i tried during bisection indicates that... i
have yet to hear to the contrary).

> 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.

indeed, though i'm baffled at how these were tested. that the odd patch here
and there can get past being run in e or having a full rebuild of efl done etc.

> 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
> 


-- 
------------- 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

Reply via email to