Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 09:56:28 -0700 Matt Turner wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, wraeth wrote: > > I am one of the users who spoke to idella4 about this, but I wanted > > to repeat this publicly in order to highlight the point of view of > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread wraeth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 12/10/15 15:56, Matt Turner wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:44 PM, wraeth > wrote: >> This education process was implemented in a way that >> indiscriminately pointed the finger at contributors, developer >> and user

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread hasufell
On 10/12/2015 06:44 AM, wraeth wrote: > > I am aware of this and that it has been the way for quite > some time. However, while it may be the norm in the wider FOSS > community, it has not been the norm on the gentoo-dev list - certainly > people will post things specifically for review, or may

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread hasufell
On 10/12/2015 06:56 AM, Matt Turner wrote: > > So work with the reviewers to ensure the communication is tactful and > graceful. > That would be appreciated. So far, we mostly got people complaining (and some setting up sieve filters to throw all our mails to trash), but not people offering

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Ian Delaney
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 08:19:34 -0700 Matt Turner wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 7:23 AM, hasufell wrote: > > > > I'm not a native speaker and people have more than once told you > > that your language is difficult to understand. > > > > So, can you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Ian Delaney
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:16:01 +0200 hasufell wrote: > On 10/12/2015 06:56 AM, Matt Turner wrote: > > > > So work with the reviewers to ensure the communication is tactful > > and graceful. > > > > That would be appreciated. So far, we mostly got people complaining > (and

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 21:29:26 +0800 Ian Delaney wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:16:01 +0200 > hasufell wrote: > > > On 10/12/2015 06:56 AM, Matt Turner wrote: > > > > > > So work with the reviewers to ensure the communication is tactful > > > and

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread hasufell
On 10/12/2015 04:12 PM, Ian Delaney wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:47:19 +0200 > hasufell wrote: > >> On 10/12/2015 03:29 PM, Ian Delaney wrote: >>> >>> Not sure how to read this. The whole idea is for provider / client >>> to communicate and negotiate a workable solution.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:53:42 +0200 hasufell wrote: > On 10/12/2015 03:41 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > > They might have failed to notify it, > > I did that 2 hours ago already on this thread. What does that tell > us ;) yes, I noticed from there :p what I meant was

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread hasufell
On 10/12/2015 03:51 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > That's why I > suggested a top-5 list or something like that, which would have weeded > out false positives and focus more on resolutions and trends than > individual incidents. > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Reviewers/Common_issues

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread hasufell
On 10/12/2015 03:58 PM, wraeth wrote: > I don't expect everything to have been within the N^th degree of > perfection from day one; and I honestly hope the Reviewers project > finds its feet and benefits the community; I just believe that it's > first day could have been handled better. > We've

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Ian Delaney
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:47:19 +0200 hasufell wrote: > On 10/12/2015 03:29 PM, Ian Delaney wrote: > > > > Not sure how to read this. The whole idea is for provider / client > > to communicate and negotiate a workable solution. At a glance this > > reads as the user needs to

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread hasufell
On 10/12/2015 03:41 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > They might have failed to notify it, I did that 2 hours ago already on this thread. What does that tell us ;) but I think they've taken into > account most, if not all, of the problems that had been pointed out: >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread wraeth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 12/10/15 22:15, hasufell wrote: > On 10/12/2015 06:44 AM, wraeth wrote: >> >> I am aware of this and that it has been the way for quite some >> time. However, while it may be the norm in the wider FOSS >> community, it has not been the norm on

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread hasufell
On 10/12/2015 03:29 PM, Ian Delaney wrote: > > Not sure how to read this. The whole idea is for provider / client to > communicate and negotiate a workable solution. At a glance this reads > as the user needs to adapt to the service that the client is offering > and appease the provider. What's

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Rich Freeman
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Ian Delaney wrote: > > Not sure how to read this. The whole idea is for provider / client to > communicate and negotiate a workable solution. At a glance this reads > as the user needs to adapt to the service that the client is offering > and

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Matt Turner
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 7:23 AM, hasufell wrote: > On 10/12/2015 04:12 PM, Ian Delaney wrote: >> On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:47:19 +0200 >> hasufell wrote: >> >>> On 10/12/2015 03:29 PM, Ian Delaney wrote: Not sure how to read this. The whole idea

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:13:15 +0800 Ian Delaney wrote: > The main target learners here are keen users. You can take told a > mistake with the background and status of a dev. They don't. They are > often intimidated and fearful if gentoo devs. We wonder why. So how about

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-12 Thread Matthias Maier
Just a comment before this discussion gets entirely side tracked. On Mon, Oct 12, 2015, at 11:45 CDT, Ian Delaney wrote: > [...] > Users are neither seasoned nor prepared for the type of review put > upon them by him and mgorny. My impression is that the reception of

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Ian Delaney
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 19:17:58 +1100 wraeth wrote: > On 11/10/15 18:52, Ian Delaney wrote: > > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:15 +0200 Alexis Ballier > > wrote: > > > > I am one of the users who spoke to idella4 about this, but I wanted to > repeat this

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Manuel Rüger
On 11.10.2015 10:29, Brendan Horan wrote: > - On 11 Oct, 2015, at 4:17 PM, wraeth wra...@wraeth.id.au wrote: > >> On 11/10/15 18:52, Ian Delaney wrote: >>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:15 +0200 Alexis Ballier >>> wrote: >>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:09:11 +0200 Michał

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread hasufell
On 10/11/2015 09:52 AM, Ian Delaney wrote: > > To my observation the reaction to this has been between displeasure and > dismay. Yesterday the dev-ML was flooded with the first day's > publication of the members' reviews. Firstly the gentoo-commits ML to my > understanding is intended to be used

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread wraeth
On 11/10/15 18:52, Ian Delaney wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:15 +0200 Alexis Ballier > wrote: > >> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:09:11 +0200 Michał Górny >> wrote: >> >>> Hello, developers. >>> >>> I have the pleasure > > :? > >>> to announce that we

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 13:04:31 +0200 hasufell wrote: > On 10/11/2015 09:52 AM, Ian Delaney wrote: > > > > To my observation the reaction to this has been between displeasure > > and dismay. Yesterday the dev-ML was flooded with the first day's > > publication of the members'

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Sven Vermeulen
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 10:09:11AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > I have the pleasure to announce that we have formed a new Reviewers > team [1] for Gentoo. The team is going to assemble developers willing > to perform ebuild reviews and help contributors improve their ebuild > skills. > > The main

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Ian Delaney
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:15 +0200 Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:09:11 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > > Hello, developers. > > > > I have the pleasure :? > > to announce that we have formed a new Reviewers > > team [1] for Gentoo.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:37:39 +0200 hasufell wrote: [...] > >> This is just a concept of peer-reviewing, which was very difficult > >> in CVS times. > > > > I fail to see how post-commit reviews are made easier with git. > > > > Quite offtopic, but we could discuss this

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread hasufell
On 10/11/2015 09:19 AM, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > > This is good news. There are quite a few developers that manage a small > subset of packages while doing tremendous work for Gentoo within that > community. For instance, they focus on particular deliverables in > repositories which eventually get

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Brendan Horan
- On 11 Oct, 2015, at 4:17 PM, wraeth wra...@wraeth.id.au wrote: > On 11/10/15 18:52, Ian Delaney wrote: >> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:15 +0200 Alexis Ballier >> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:09:11 +0200 Michał Górny >>> wrote: >>> Hello,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread James Le Cuirot
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 13:02:50 +0200 Manuel Rüger wrote: > It might be also worth to think about limiting the feedback to the > actual patch that is included in a pull request or whatever is used as > transport media. > I have the feeling that some pull requests are accepted,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Michał Górny
Dnia 2015-10-11, o godz. 15:52:40 Ian Delaney napisał(a): > To my observation the reaction to this has been between displeasure and > dismay. Yesterday the dev-ML was flooded with the first day's > publication of the members' reviews. Firstly the gentoo-commits ML to my >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Michał Górny
Dnia 2015-10-11, o godz. 13:02:50 Manuel Rüger napisał(a): > On 11.10.2015 10:29, Brendan Horan wrote: > > - On 11 Oct, 2015, at 4:17 PM, wraeth wra...@wraeth.id.au wrote: > > > >> On 11/10/15 18:52, Ian Delaney wrote: > >>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:27:15 +0200 Alexis

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Matt Turner
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, wraeth wrote: > I am one of the users who spoke to idella4 about this, but I wanted to > repeat this publicly in order to highlight the point of view of > contributing user as opposed to a developer. > > Firstly I would like to say that I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Ian Delaney
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 09:56:28 -0700 Matt Turner wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, wraeth wrote: > > > > I feel that it is inappropriate for criticisms of contributor's > > work to be broadcast on a mailing list that is read not only by the > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Ian Delaney
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 19:37:23 -0700 Matt Turner wrote: > >> > >> Mailing list review is the *norm* in the free software world. > >> > > > > Oh, the norm > > You're being quite rude with attempted mockery -- actually, the rest > of your reply is pretty abrupt as well. > > If

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread wraeth
I'm not trying to escalate the argument but you seem to have misinterpreted my initial message. On 12/10/15 03:56, Matt Turner wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, wraeth wrote: >> I am one of the users who spoke to idella4 about this, but I wanted >> to repeat this

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Matt Turner
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:49 PM, NP-Hardass wrote: > I'm not sure if this is what Ian is referring to, but between the sheer > quantity (flooding) and the way I perceived some of the messages to be > formulated, it all seemed rather abrasive in nature. Of course this > was

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Matt Turner
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Ian Delaney wrote: > On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 09:56:28 -0700 > Matt Turner wrote: > >> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, wraeth wrote: > >> > >> > I feel that it is inappropriate for criticisms of

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread NP-Hardass
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 19:37:23 -0700 Matt Turner wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Ian Delaney > wrote: >> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 09:56:28 -0700 Matt Turner >> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, wraeth

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-11 Thread Matt Turner
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:44 PM, wraeth wrote: > I'm not trying to escalate the argument but you seem to have > misinterpreted my initial message. > > On 12/10/15 03:56, Matt Turner wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, wraeth wrote: >>> I am one of

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-10 Thread hasufell
On 10/10/2015 05:34 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > It is no secret that I don't care about "hats" :) > If someone is right, he's right, a QA hat doesn't make something wrong > magically right. Also, if you'd ask me, QA should be more about Quality > Assurance, meaning training people, writing

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-10 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:09:11 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > Hello, developers. > > I have the pleasure to announce that we have formed a new Reviewers > team [1] for Gentoo. The team is going to assemble developers willing > to perform ebuild reviews and help contributors

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-10 Thread hasufell
On 10/10/2015 04:27 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: >> The side goal is to review current Gentoo commits for major QA >> violations and other issues, aiming at improving the quality of >> ebuilds in Gentoo and helping other developers using bash, ebuilds >> and git effectively. > > This is completely

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-10 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 16:44:45 +0200 hasufell wrote: > On 10/10/2015 04:27 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > >> The side goal is to review current Gentoo commits for major QA > >> violations and other issues, aiming at improving the quality of > >> ebuilds in Gentoo and helping

[gentoo-dev] [RFC/announcement] Reviewers project

2015-10-10 Thread Michał Górny
Hello, developers. I have the pleasure to announce that we have formed a new Reviewers team [1] for Gentoo. The team is going to assemble developers willing to perform ebuild reviews and help contributors improve their ebuild skills. The main goal of the team is to handle GitHub pull requests.