Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> writes: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:54:45PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote: >> On Friday, March 9, 2018 12:12:28 PM PDT Mark Janes wrote: >> [snip] >> > I've been doing this for Intel. Developers are on the hook to fix their >> > bugs, but you can't make them do it. They have many pressures on them, >> > and a maintainer can't make the call as to whether a rendering bug is >> > more important than day-1 vulkan conformance, for example. >> > >> > We could heighten the transparency of what is blocking the build by >> > publicizing the authors of bisected blocking bugs to Phoronix, which >> > might get things moving. >> >> I hope you're being sarcastic here, or else I'm misunderstanding your >> proposal. Public shaming of developers who create bugs has absolutely >> no place in the Mesa community, IMHO. It would foster the kind of toxic >> community that none of us want to be a part of. >> >> Sometimes, people who create bugs are the very people that work the >> hardest, who the project may not even exist without. Would you want >> to chew out someone for creating a bug in a Vulkan driver when...if it >> weren't for that person, you wouldn't have a Vulkan driver at all? Or, >> maybe they caused a couple bad bugs...but also fixed hundreds of them. >> >> Other times, they're new contributors or volunteers who do this, not as >> their day job. Frankly, those people are under no obligation to help us >> at all, so we need to thank them and appreciate the time and effort they >> spend - and give them a hand fixing things when they're too busy, or >> don't have the relevant hardware or skill to track down a regression. >> >> It's easy to be pissed off when there are bugs, and things seem to not >> be making progress, but let's try and keep things positive and work >> together to make Mesa the best we can. > > I'd like to second this with my experience from the kernel community. The > public shaming game for when you create a regression is very strong there, > lead by Linus Torvalds. In my experience this directly causes: > > - Maintainers to hide bug reports and regressions reports at all costs, > because having Linus destroy you just aint never worth it. The meta game > becomes "avoid getting railed" instead of "deliver quality code", and > there's lots of ways to easily achieve the former that serious hurt the > latter. > > - Best practice (in my experience) is to not mention the dreaded > "REGRESSION" tag when you need another maintainer's help to fix a > regression, because it's too likely they'll just panic. That means they > start screaming at you to go away, or brain locks up and they can't > effectively help you track down the bug (seen both cases). > > - Creates a culture where talking about process/tooling improvements to > prevent regressions and/or handle them quicker becomes too dangerous, > because it all turns into a personal shaming game of who maintains the > worst subsystem. > > Long term you end up with a culture fucked up for good :-/ > > Imo the only way to make this better is to try analyzing why a regressions > happened, and fix the tooling to prevent that in the future. Maybe better > test coverage (and long term efforts to fix known gaps), maybe better > presentation of automated checks (stuff like github pull requests that > automatically run CI and report full results, blocking the merge if > anything is amiss).
You have to have a very strong CI to use it to block commits. i965 Mesa has a big CI which identifies many regressions, but I wouldn't want to checkpoint commits in an automated way. A large pool of obsolete CI hardware will have lower reliability than the mesa master branch -- which generates noise for developers and impedes progress. > Personally I have high hopes for gitlab.fd.o to enable us to do a lot of > that automation in a much better and much more discoverable way, but it's > some ways in the future still. Besides better quality that would also help > us ramp up new contributors, since instead of unwritten rules they'd not > just get documented merge criteria, but have a pile of bots that > interactively walk them through everything (the best projects auto-insert > a comment from the bot with instructions how to repro results if anything > fails, with links to further docs). > > Assume that people try to do the best and fix the tooling/support > infrastructure to allow them to, and they will deliver. Blaming them just > drives them into hiding and looking for better places to have fun. > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list email@example.com https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev