On Thursday 08 December 2005 9:29 pm, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > - gnucash-patches is being use for two very different purposes; 1) > user patch submission, 2) syndication of commit messages.
When I subscribed, I expected gnucash-changes to be the automated logs and gnucash-patches for submissions. To me, that is more intuitive. > Goals: > - I want the user-submitted patches and follow-up discussion to get > a lot of visibility. > - I'd love to unsubscribe from the commit message syndication and cut > my gnucash-related email in half. As long as the diffs still come through so that each of us is aware if someone commits a change that maybe conflicts with local development code or contains a flaw that would be obvious to someone else. SVN diffs -> gnucash-changes because the code has changed. patches -> gnucash-patches because the patch needs to be applied. Cease all current svn direction to gnucash-patches. Overall, that's is the most intuitive IMHO plus it means the fewest changes to existing arrangements. All we need to do is declare how it's done and stop the hook from svn to gnucash-patches. > I propose that we make gnucash-patches read-only, i.e. I'd go for the opposite - leave gnucash-patches as is - read-write. Make gnucash-changes the ONLY output for SVN messages, almost as is. That could be read-only. > - document that user-submitted code should be sent to -devel -patches. > - allow posts to -patches only from svn commit hook allow posts to -changes only from svn commit hook (because the code has been changed) > - set ReplyTo as gnucash-devel, so any response to a commit-message > goes to -devel Agreed. > - gnucash-patches becomes essentially only a syndication of commit (gnucash-changes) > messages, which some people seem to want. The naming seems obtuse - patches are what come in, changes are what we make. When a developer with svn access makes a commit, that is a change to the codebase - gnucash-changes. When a developer/user without svn access creates a patch, it would seem natural to send that to gnucash-patches. Once applied, it goes onto gnucash-changes. > Disclaimer: I have diminishing sympathy for any self-proclaimed > non-developers who might say that they want to remain subscribed to > -devel but don't want user-sumbitted patches crowding their inbox. Agreed. I see no reason for the current messages from SVN to gnucash-patches (never have really). I think they should stop and leave gnucash-patches only for contributed code and gnucash-changes only for commit messages *with* diffs. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
pgpdTcFz7qCtc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
