Ow and:
https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/intro-user.html
And not about tools... but they have implemented workflow...
Op ma 23 dec. 2019 om 23:24 schreef Disruptive Solutions <
disruptivesolution...@gmail.com>:
> Did you look at https://www.atlassian.com/nl/software/crucible
Did you look at https://www.atlassian.com/nl/software/crucible ??
And: https://www.perforce.com/solutions/static-analysis
https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows
The concept "The Centralized Workflow" was the "old" workflow, but now
maybe the concept "Feature branching" is
Hi,
> Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I
> know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but
> that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this
> list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page.
Non committers
+1 keep it simple
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone
> Op 23 dec. 2019 om 17:06 heeft Sebastien Lorquet het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> OK.
>
> That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these
> discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads
>
Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I
know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but
that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this
list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page. (Hint:
People who particip
On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 11:06 AM Sebastien Lorquet wrote:
>
> OK.
>
> That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these
> discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads
> full
> of heated opinions in 2-3 days is insane.
>
> I just cant dedicat
I think the process should be as simple as possible, and improved later. Just
select the absolute bare minimum that could start to work and discard everything
else so this project can work again.
Depends on what you mean by simple. Using some less-than-simple tools
can make the workflow ver
Agreed.. It is painful and awkward and I am not so optimistic at the
moment. We will have to give it more time and see if people and learn
to cooperate in groups or not.
Also, I did not see a notification that the BB repositories had been frozen.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/nuttx/
OK.
That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these
discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads full
of heated opinions in 2-3 days is insane.
I just cant dedicate enough time reading any more of this. I have other things
to do than tryin
Two questions:
1 Who will apply the patches?
2 Can we use and merge a PR that has been reviewed?
You are basically asking for the workflow requirements.
m: 张铎(Duo Zhang) [mailto:palomino...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 23, 2019 4:35 AM
> To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal
>
> For our Chinese people we do not think starting working when the
> requirements are not very clear is a big r
: Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal
For our Chinese people we do not think starting working when the
requirements are not very clear is a big risk, this is what happens every
day here. You can not plan everything so just have a try, if it does not
work then just drop it and retry, no harm
For our Chinese people we do not think starting working when the
requirements are not very clear is a big risk, this is what happens every
day here. You can not plan everything so just have a try, if it does not
work then just drop it and retry, no harm :)
And in my experience, if we can not agree
Hi,
> I was thinking about calling a vote on limiting the # of emails.
IMO A vote will not help, it will make things worse, perhaps try discuss but
most of all just try to be a little more considerate for people who are
subscribers to this list. No hard rules just guidelines and consideration o
Hi,
>-Original Message-
>From: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com]
>Sent: Monday, December 23, 2019 1:09 AM
>To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal
>Hi,
>> I would also suggest you try to slow down the conversa
Hi,
> I would also suggest you try to slow down the conversation here and think a
> little more about what you write, that way you get higher quality responses.
It’s also allows more timid people and those who are not full time on this to
speak up and get noticed. Some ASF people make a self im
Well Said!
-Original Message-
From: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com]
Sent: Monday, December 23, 2019 1:02 AM
To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal
Hi,
Apache has a concept of small reversible steps, if something can move the
project
Hi,
Apache has a concept of small reversible steps, if something can move the
project forward, try it out, it it doesn’t work or you find a problem need just
make another small step in the right direction.
Many many Apache projects use CTR (commit and review later) and have simple
workflows an
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 8:18 PM Nathan Hartman
wrote:
>
> Yesterday I wrote a detailed email giving the exact outline of what needs
> to be in that workflow document.
>
> Do we really have no volunteers to bang out even a rough draft of that
> document?
>
>
You both sucked me in again... But thi
The danger of what is happening now is that it will become grandfathered in
with no proper workflow in place, no proper criteria for processing
changes, and no clear documentation that helps committers or the public to
contribute.
If that comes to pass, I think I would be forced to resign. Ap
The danger of what is happening now is that it will become grandfathered in
with no proper workflow in place, no proper criteria for processing
changes, and no clear documentation that helps committers or the public to
contribute.
We have to decline any attempt to include an test framework co
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 9:02 PM Gregory Nutt wrote:
>
> > But the #1 most critical thing facing this project is adopting even
> > just the requirements for the workflow. None of the other issues have
> > any significant importance
> >
> > So I have to be opposed to any obstacles that jeopardize
But the #1 most critical thing facing this project is adopting even
just the requirements for the workflow. None of the other issues have
any significant importance
So I have to be opposed to any obstacles that jeopardize or distract
from the #1 priority thing.
One of the dangers of dela
I will be stepping away from all further discussion on the work flow topic as I
have soured on it and don't have a real vote beyond proposing it.
You are lucky that you have that option. I would too if it were
possible. This no way that anyone should have to waste there life.
But the #1
I don't like it because it is not the workflow that has been discussed
and I can never support a slam dunk of any workflow that is not
described in the workflow requirements document.
I will vote -1 if we cannot be assured that this this cannot become a
disease that we cannot shake. My propos
I proposed this because I think it is a solid flow and in alignment with
other stable opensource projects that I contribute to including one under
the FSF complexity.
It is NOT a rush and I don't think it is out of line. Multiple +1 were
given, so I don't think it's that far off what will work.
There are several things I don't like about this proposal:
- It is in complete conflict with everything we have discussed
about the commit workflow
- I think is is suggest out of panic. We have plenty of times to
do things right or to do things better. There will be no pressi
There are several things I don't like about this proposal:
- It is in complete conflict with everything we have discussed about
the commit workflow
- I think is is suggest out of panic. We have plenty of times to do
things right or to do things better. There will be no pressing nee
I don't think that were will be much that has to be acted on during
the holidays. And, in any event, I would rather see a backlog of work
build up than to to see an interim, wrong workflow put in place. Doing
things right is more important that doing things quickly.
I would add that I do no
Let's get everyone's thoughts on the table
I suppose that we should keep the discussion for 72 hours then call the
vote. We need to allow time for everyone to comment and with the
holidays, we may not be able to get good feedback. Should we still call
a vote if people are not participatin
1) The timeline. Two weeks over the holiday to come to a formal
agreement
is going to be tough and I also don't think just because we have a path
forward people will stop caring about proposing a better solution. From
what I'm seeing the longer term proposal will likely get into the
weeds of
31 matches
Mail list logo
