Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 2012-07-14 18:27, Chris Rees wrote: On 14 July 2012 16:24, Vitaly Magerya vmage...@gmail.com wrote: One problem (at least how it appears to me) is that when a PR gets automatically assigned to a maintainer who is also a committer, it is not automatically unassigned if the person is missing for a few months, and other committers ignore the PR because it is already assigned. This only happened once to me, but it took 6 months for another committer to notice it. And that was pretty fast, comparing to, say ports/154456 [1], which is open since 2011-02. Is automatic unassignment possible? Technically yes, but it's highly undesirable. You can feel free to bring it up here if you think that's happened. Hi, everyone. Two of my PRs, ports/175223 [1] and ports/176701 [2], have been automatically assigned to committers, and both have reached maintainer timeout a while ago. Could someone unassign them, so other committers could take a look? Thanks in advance. (I still think this should be done automatically. I would prefer not to bother everyone at ports@ for such things). [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/175223 [2] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/176701 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 3/25/2013 5:19 AM, Vitaly Magerya wrote: On 2012-07-14 18:27, Chris Rees wrote: On 14 July 2012 16:24, Vitaly Magerya vmage...@gmail.com wrote: One problem (at least how it appears to me) is that when a PR gets automatically assigned to a maintainer who is also a committer, it is not automatically unassigned if the person is missing for a few months, and other committers ignore the PR because it is already assigned. This only happened once to me, but it took 6 months for another committer to notice it. And that was pretty fast, comparing to, say ports/154456 [1], which is open since 2011-02. Is automatic unassignment possible? Technically yes, but it's highly undesirable. You can feel free to bring it up here if you think that's happened. Hi, everyone. Two of my PRs, ports/175223 [1] and ports/176701 [2], have been automatically assigned to committers, and both have reached maintainer timeout a while ago. Could someone unassign them, so other committers could take a look? Thanks in advance. (I still think this should be done automatically. I would prefer not to bother everyone at ports@ for such things). [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/175223 [2] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/176701 I've reset these PR to the pool so anyone can grab them now. -- Regards, Bryan Drewery bdrewery@freenode/EFNet signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 14 August 2012 15:47, Radim Kolar h...@filez.com wrote: I mailed them, after 1 month no change. I would not bother with creating patches next time. Patches take time. FreeBSD tends to optimize for throughput, not latency. I have same experience with pretty much every open source project, everybody talks on list, nobody works. If i send patch, it takes months to review even 1 or 2 line patch. Fork is necessity for any serious development. You are joking w.r.t. a fork, right? -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/165939 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169910 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166488 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/167289 Have you reminded them by email recently? Apache@ is a team, so it's a little uncertain where timeouts and approval stands with them. I mailed them, after 1 month no change. I would not bother with creating patches next time. I have same experience with pretty much every open source project, everybody talks on list, nobody works. If i send patch, it takes months to review even 1 or 2 line patch. Fork is necessity for any serious development. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am 18.07.2012 08:37, schrieb Lars Engels: On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:43:02PM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote: Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't technically have a way to do either of the following: - let people commit to just some ports Shouldn't this work with subversion? The problem isn't purely technical. The technical component is easily solved, but there are social and trust issues, and I'm not so sure if there is a middle layer. I think the underlying proposal might expedite the maintenance of a few individual ports in borderline cases, but this middle layer of contributors between submitters and committers is close enough to the committers so that I personally would see it as a needless additional abstraction that just complicates matters for little gain. And then there are issues that aren't bit-sized, but larger, hence they end up in abandoned or formally suspended PRs that contribute to the backlog. Expediting throughput of a few ports isn't going to help those at all, but they form the backlog... -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlAIhFQACgkQvmGDOQUufZWmHwCfapbIdd0kpa6GZ7xnxV+f8gHj 9u4AnjEZV/yExbJILhnro3z8V0xnFPY0 =d29M -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 17 Jul 2012 23:17, John Marino freebs...@marino.st wrote: On 7/17/2012 23:39, Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:54:59AM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? The answer to that is very complex. And, for each PR, maybe a different answer. This is true, but to address the previous question ... It is somewhat difficult to recruit new people who are willing to work within guidelines (both technical and social) and who seem to want to stay for the long-term. portmgr does screen candidates to try to make sure that the quality of the Ports Collection doesn't decline. Each vote is a judgement call. Having said that, we add new committers all the time. OTOH we add new ports all the time, and due to this the backlog seems to remain constant. And again, as scheidell notes, some PRs are more equal than others. mcl Hi Mark, I think that's a reasonable assessment about how the backlog seems about the same and how processes just naturally work. But I think it could work better. Let's take my case. I'm a maintainer of several Ada ports and compilers. I'm also a pkgsrc committer, but not a FreeBSD ports committer. I have the same packages in both trees, but the pkgsrc packages (ports) are more current. That's obviously because I can commit to one tree at will but I have to submit PR and get in line for each update at FreeBSD (A quick shout out of appreciation to Frederic who has been tremendously gracious to me over these months). I was thinking about this - I really like how FreeBSD ports enforces to the best of its ability that every port have a maintainer. My name is on several ports and I have pride in my work. Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? Obviously you might be reluctant to do this on ports that 200 packages depend on, but if you created a tier of contributors below committer but above PR submitter, I think a lot of ports would be maintained more often and there wouldn't be so much of a backlog. The worst case scenario is a contributor turns out to be a little sloppy, doesn't bother to use Tinderbox, etc, and after a couple of incidents you pull his privileges. The benefit you gain from the others would outweigh the incidents. I've seen the response that the committer is responsible for everything he or she commits, but if the community gave them immunity from consequences of maintainer patches, it shouldn't be a problem. I don't expect anything to come of this suggestion, but I've always wondered why more responsibility wasn't given to port maintainers who don't have commit privileges. I got around this by linking in my PRs a Tinderbox log showing a successful build. For some developers, this was enough to just commit. Not sure if I would feel the same way nowadays though ;) Of course there are names we recognise, and these people usually end up with a commit bit eventually anyway. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:43:02PM -0500, Mark Linimon wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote: Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't technically have a way to do either of the following: - let people commit to just some ports Shouldn't this work with subversion? pgpstPXYxNAYD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/18/2012 00:43, Mark Linimon wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote: Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't technically have a way to do either of the following: - let people commit to just some ports - have any patches be autocommitted No one has ever tackled the former problem. The latter problem just seems to me to open up ways for people to abuse the system. It makes me nervous. Well, between the two I would suggest a combination of let people autocommit patches to just some ports. Reasons - Don't have to hassle with the logistics of giving a limited commit bit, risk getting the permissions wrong, and removing it after the maintainer retires. You'd have to create an automatic system that could verify the patches apply cleanly (or maybe just accept file replacements), and that the files came from maintainer. A public/private key system should do that. All you'd need to do is is map keys to ports and not accept any files outside of the allowed area. Removing that mapping is a lot easier than tweaking commit privileges. Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I think. John ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, John Marino freebs...@marino.st wrote: On 7/18/2012 00:43, Mark Linimon wrote: On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote: Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't technically have a way to do either of the following: - let people commit to just some ports - have any patches be autocommitted No one has ever tackled the former problem. The latter problem just seems to me to open up ways for people to abuse the system. It makes me nervous. Well, between the two I would suggest a combination of let people autocommit patches to just some ports. Reasons - Don't have to hassle with the logistics of giving a limited commit bit, risk getting the permissions wrong, and removing it after the maintainer retires. You'd have to create an automatic system that could verify the patches apply cleanly (or maybe just accept file replacements), and that the files came from maintainer. A public/private key system should do that. All you'd need to do is is map keys to ports and not accept any files outside of the allowed area. Removing that mapping is a lot easier than tweaking commit privileges. Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I think. It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide. I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/18/2012 12:19, Chris Rees wrote: On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, John Marinofreebs...@marino.st wrote: Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I think. It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide. I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly. Chris I wouldn't assume people that become this proficient necessarily want a commit bit. The whole point of my proposal is give and take. Yes, you take away QA responsibility from an entire pool of committers and make it the primary responsibility of this new class of maintainer on a per port basis (and not nearly all ports either). I was proposing that your gains (much less PRs, more often maintained ports) far outweigh the liabilities. I would be selective who gets assigned to this new class. They should have a body of work that instills confidence that they can handle QA. You don't get something for nothing and it's not hard to revoke the privilege if a person can't handle it. John ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 18 Jul 2012 11:33, John Marino freebs...@marino.st wrote: On 7/18/2012 12:19, Chris Rees wrote: On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, John Marinofreebs...@marino.st wrote: Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I think. It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide. I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly. Chris I wouldn't assume people that become this proficient necessarily want a commit bit. The whole point of my proposal is give and take. Yes, you take away QA responsibility from an entire pool of committers and make it the primary responsibility of this new class of maintainer on a per port basis (and not nearly all ports either). I was proposing that your gains (much less PRs, more often maintained ports) far outweigh the liabilities. I would be selective who gets assigned to this new class. They should have a body of work that instills confidence that they can handle QA. You don't get something for nothing and it's not hard to revoke the privilege if a person can't handle it. You are making a good point, but I'm trying to explain that the 'body of work' for proposing a new developer is no greater than the standard you suggest. We do have developers who only commit to their own ports; while it's generally hoped that they work on PRs too, it's not a requirement. These would fall under the category of 'super maintainers' if you like. For further reading, Google 'Solutions for the PR load problem'. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/18/2012 12:40, Chris Rees wrote: You are making a good point, but I'm trying to explain that the 'body of work' for proposing a new developer is no greater than the standard you suggest. We do have developers who only commit to their own ports; while it's generally hoped that they work on PRs too, it's not a requirement. These would fall under the category of 'super maintainers' if you like. For further reading, Google 'Solutions for the PR load problem'. A very interesting read and essentially addresses the topic I started, with a different implementation. You've been consistent in your concern, but maybe what I'm getting at is that these super maintainers don't need to be held to the same standard as someone with a commit bit. Hopefully they are every bit as capable as a committer, but if they are only interested in maintaining say 10 ports and those ports aren't in the critical path of more important ports, what's the harm in handing the reins to a slightly less experienced person that wants to do it esp. with a large PR backlog? If it passes lint and tinderbox checks, it's got to have some (acceptable) quality level. Over time and with experience the maintainer will improve anyway, especially if he/she is also directly any PRs against the port. That's another topic -- these super maintainers should be able to close PRs as well on their ports. Speaking for myself, I think I'd make a good super-maintainer and I think the quality would be very high on my ports. I know I'm not alone. John ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/17/12 7:41 AM, Radim Kolar wrote: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? The answer to that is very complex. And, for each PR, maybe a different answer. for some, there is no maintainer (owned by ports@), you are more than welcome to look through the list of ports owned by port@ and adopt a couple hundred of them. For some, the submitter reported a problem, some problems are upstream, some the submitter. For some, the attached patch does not follow FreeBSD ports guidelines, and until (someone) rewrites it, it just sites. some are suspended waiting on other pr's. So, for each of those open pr's, there is, most likely, different answers. I have (4 or 5?) pr's open, waiting on feedback from submitters or maintainers. If a patch was attached, and the port builds, ant it times out, I'll commit it. So, you want to help? adopt a couple hundreds ports, learn the system, make good patches, and in doing so, you will quickly find out what a lot of these are just sitting there. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Michael Scheidell, CTO *| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation d: +1.561.948.2259 w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
Radim Kolar h...@filez.com: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? More committers does not mean that the backlog will be processed faster, just as more developers on a project does not mean that the project is done faster. ;-) Cheers Marcus ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:53:34 +0200 Marcus von Appen articulated: Radim Kolar h...@filez.com: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? More committers does not mean that the backlog will be processed faster, just as more developers on a project does not mean that the project is done faster. ;-) “The race may not always be to the swift nor the victory to the strong, but that's how you bet” Damon Runyon You point is well taken though. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 17 July 2012 04:53, Marcus von Appen m...@freebsd.org wrote: Radim Kolar h...@filez.com: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? More committers does not mean that the backlog will be processed faster, just as more developers on a project does not mean that the project is done faster. ;-) Agreed. However, take a look at the commit bits granted in the past few months: http://www.freebsd.org/news/newsflash.html - we are growing. :) -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:54:59AM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? The answer to that is very complex. And, for each PR, maybe a different answer. This is true, but to address the previous question ... It is somewhat difficult to recruit new people who are willing to work within guidelines (both technical and social) and who seem to want to stay for the long-term. portmgr does screen candidates to try to make sure that the quality of the Ports Collection doesn't decline. Each vote is a judgement call. Having said that, we add new committers all the time. OTOH we add new ports all the time, and due to this the backlog seems to remain constant. And again, as scheidell notes, some PRs are more equal than others. mcl ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 7/17/2012 23:39, Mark Linimon wrote: On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:54:59AM -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote: We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. ports have about 900 open PR. Why it does not have more port commiters? Its difficult to recruit new person? The answer to that is very complex. And, for each PR, maybe a different answer. This is true, but to address the previous question ... It is somewhat difficult to recruit new people who are willing to work within guidelines (both technical and social) and who seem to want to stay for the long-term. portmgr does screen candidates to try to make sure that the quality of the Ports Collection doesn't decline. Each vote is a judgement call. Having said that, we add new committers all the time. OTOH we add new ports all the time, and due to this the backlog seems to remain constant. And again, as scheidell notes, some PRs are more equal than others. mcl Hi Mark, I think that's a reasonable assessment about how the backlog seems about the same and how processes just naturally work. But I think it could work better. Let's take my case. I'm a maintainer of several Ada ports and compilers. I'm also a pkgsrc committer, but not a FreeBSD ports committer. I have the same packages in both trees, but the pkgsrc packages (ports) are more current. That's obviously because I can commit to one tree at will but I have to submit PR and get in line for each update at FreeBSD (A quick shout out of appreciation to Frederic who has been tremendously gracious to me over these months). I was thinking about this - I really like how FreeBSD ports enforces to the best of its ability that every port have a maintainer. My name is on several ports and I have pride in my work. Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? Obviously you might be reluctant to do this on ports that 200 packages depend on, but if you created a tier of contributors below committer but above PR submitter, I think a lot of ports would be maintained more often and there wouldn't be so much of a backlog. The worst case scenario is a contributor turns out to be a little sloppy, doesn't bother to use Tinderbox, etc, and after a couple of incidents you pull his privileges. The benefit you gain from the others would outweigh the incidents. I've seen the response that the committer is responsible for everything he or she commits, but if the community gave them immunity from consequences of maintainer patches, it shouldn't be a problem. I don't expect anything to come of this suggestion, but I've always wondered why more responsibility wasn't given to port maintainers who don't have commit privileges. John ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:09:50AM +0200, John Marino wrote: Would it be so bad if all my submitted patches (as a recognized quality contributor with history) just got committed as a passthrough? This has been explored on the mailing lists before, however, we don't technically have a way to do either of the following: - let people commit to just some ports - have any patches be autocommitted No one has ever tackled the former problem. The latter problem just seems to me to open up ways for people to abuse the system. It makes me nervous. As a counter-suggestion, with the addition of new hardware to redports, we are starting to see people referencing a correct install/deinstall log that has already been created there. But IMHO we still want to have committers going over the diffs to make sure that e.g. there are no trojans and no undocumented changes in behavior (config file locations, startup scripts, and so forth), at least to the maximum extent feasible. There's some kind of middle ground between letting too many people have commit access, and too few, and we've tried to walk it. I doubt that this explanation will answer your (legitimate) criticsm, however. mcl ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
can be maintainer timeout for port patch submissions implemented for people which are FREEBSD commiters? I see no reason why they should be exception from standard port processing. If they do not care about their ports, they should not have power to obstruct other people work. I have really long term bad experience with that (usually there are stuck for 6+ months). I know that it was discussed, but nothing constructive was done. currently i have in queue just these 2: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166488 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/167289 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 14 July 2012 15:05, Radim Kolar h...@filez.com wrote: can be maintainer timeout for port patch submissions implemented for people which are FREEBSD commiters? I see no reason why they should be exception from standard port processing. If they do not care about their ports, they should not have power to obstruct other people work. I have really long term bad experience with that (usually there are stuck for 6+ months). I know that it was discussed, but nothing constructive was done. currently i have in queue just these 2: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166488 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/167289 No-one is exempt from timeouts on ports except secteam and portmgr. Have you reminded them by email recently? Apache@ is a team, so it's a little uncertain where timeouts and approval stands with them. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 14 July 2012 07:51, Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org wrote: On 14 July 2012 15:05, Radim Kolar h...@filez.com wrote: can be maintainer timeout for port patch submissions implemented for people which are FREEBSD commiters? I see no reason why they should be exception from standard port processing. If they do not care about their ports, they should not have power to obstruct other people work. I have really long term bad experience with that (usually there are stuck for 6+ months). I know that it was discussed, but nothing constructive was done. currently i have in queue just these 2: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166488 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/167289 No-one is exempt from timeouts on ports except secteam and portmgr. Have you reminded them by email recently? Apache@ is a team, so it's a little uncertain where timeouts and approval stands with them. Generally, teams can't timeout. Try poking them a bit and see what they say. :) -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org wrote: No-one is exempt from timeouts on ports except secteam and portmgr. One problem (at least how it appears to me) is that when a PR gets automatically assigned to a maintainer who is also a committer, it is not automatically unassigned if the person is missing for a few months, and other committers ignore the PR because it is already assigned. This only happened once to me, but it took 6 months for another committer to notice it. And that was pretty fast, comparing to, say ports/154456 [1], which is open since 2011-02. Is automatic unassignment possible? [1] http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/154456 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 14 July 2012 16:24, Vitaly Magerya vmage...@gmail.com wrote: Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org wrote: No-one is exempt from timeouts on ports except secteam and portmgr. One problem (at least how it appears to me) is that when a PR gets automatically assigned to a maintainer who is also a committer, it is not automatically unassigned if the person is missing for a few months, and other committers ignore the PR because it is already assigned. This only happened once to me, but it took 6 months for another committer to notice it. And that was pretty fast, comparing to, say ports/154456 [1], which is open since 2011-02. Is automatic unassignment possible? Technically yes, but it's highly undesirable. You can feel free to bring it up here if you think that's happened. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
No-one is exempt from timeouts on ports except secteam and portmgr. can i get this http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/165939 unassigned from secteam and processed it as normal freebsd bug? Secteam does not seems to be interested enough and it is single line fix. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 14 July 2012 17:07, Radim Kolar h...@filez.com wrote: No-one is exempt from timeouts on ports except secteam and portmgr. can i get this http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/165939 unassigned from secteam and processed it as normal freebsd bug? Secteam does not seems to be interested enough and it is single line fix. I've reassigned it to ipfw mailing list-- it's more appropriate for there. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org wrote: Is automatic unassignment possible? Technically yes, but it's highly undesirable. Why? You can feel free to bring it up here if you think that's happened. I will, if it'll happen to me. In the mean while here's an incomplete list of PRs that where (auto)assigned to committers in June and didn't see any progress in at least 2 weeks: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168564 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168571 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168629 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168667 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168840 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168850 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168870 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168917 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168957 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169076 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169271 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169287 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169305 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169369 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169370 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169388 (previous one is misassigned; the submitter *is* the maintainer) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169458 (I did not expect there to be this many of them). In some of these cases I think that work may continue behind the scenes, but it's hard to tell. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 14 July 2012 17:34, Vitaly Magerya vmage...@gmail.com wrote: Chris Rees cr...@freebsd.org wrote: Is automatic unassignment possible? Technically yes, but it's highly undesirable. Why? You can feel free to bring it up here if you think that's happened. I will, if it'll happen to me. In the mean while here's an incomplete list of PRs that where (auto)assigned to committers in June and didn't see any progress in at least 2 weeks: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168564 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168571 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168629 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168667 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168840 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168850 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168870 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168917 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/168957 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169076 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169271 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169287 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169305 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169369 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169370 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169388 (previous one is misassigned; the submitter *is* the maintainer) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/169458 Normally a ping to the maintainer reveals the delay-- I've taken ports/169388 because the autoassigner looked at the Synopsis which was written wrongly. If you want to check progress, send a followup to the PR. In some of these cases I think that work may continue behind the scenes, but it's hard to tell. Usually, but people should generally reply to acknowledge the PR. Chris ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 03:51:23PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote: On 14 July 2012 15:05, Radim Kolar h...@filez.com wrote: can be maintainer timeout for port patch submissions implemented for people which are FREEBSD commiters? I see no reason why they should be exception from standard port processing. If they do not care about their ports, they should not have power to obstruct other people work. I have really long term bad experience with that (usually there are stuck for 6+ months). I know that it was discussed, but nothing constructive was done. currently i have in queue just these 2: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/166488 http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/167289 No-one is exempt from timeouts on ports except secteam and portmgr. Oh yeah! Holy secteam@ proves to have ~5 years timeout. I watched if it can grows more, but someone recently commits exact the changes I purpose (apparently without their notice) so bigger timeouts are not proved yet. But I think secteam@ have very good potential in timeouts growing and overcome its own achievement some day. -- http://ache.vniz.net/ ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
Oh yeah! Holy secteam@ proves to have ~5 years timeout. 5 years is nothing special man. I got one too! http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/109272 ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters
On 14 July 2012 12:42, Radim Kolar h...@filez.com wrote: Oh yeah! Holy secteam@ proves to have ~5 years timeout. 5 years is nothing special man. I got one too! none of you beat http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/1375. sometimes PRs are hard, and sometimes PRs slip through the cracks. We *are* making progress in cutting through the backlog though. Take a look at http://www.oook.cz/bsd/prstats/arriverates.html and http://www.oook.cz/bsd/prstats/closerates.html -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
