On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 19:18 -0400, Robinson Tryon wrote:
I fully agree with this sentiment -- the dev-list should be taylored to be
inviting to a wide audience of volunteer contributors and not only to those
hardcore contributors who are full-time sponsored developers.
...
So, is there
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 10:15:41AM +0200, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
Don't u consider sending nothing to report spam in a way?
On May 2, 2013 9:42 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@sud-ouest.org
wrote:
Le 02/05/2013 07:49, Jonathan Aquilina a écrit :
If there is nothing to report is it
Hey all,
so in my eyes the consensus here is the following:
(1) we want to get informed about new stuff to
- either react/ review it as a regular developer or
- to keep up with a topic as sparetime contributor
(2) too many automaticly sent mails blur the view for important messages
and
On 05/01/2013 09:33 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Opinions?
My initial reaction to the gerrit web UI is it sucks. Take, e.g.,
comments made directly in the source code: On a change's overview page,
you can see that there /are/ comments to certain files of a patch set,
but to actually see
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Stephan Bergmann sberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/01/2013 09:33 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Opinions?
if you happen to be logged into gerrit, the file you looked at is
automatically marked as reviewed
You can turn that off
on a 'diff' view, click on
Hi,
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 05:13:53PM +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
But upon yet further reflection, it appears to me that mail does hit
a sweet spot there. Like with git commits, where in principle one
can stay informed via git fetch/git log. But, at least to me, it
appears way more
On Thu, 2 May 2013 18:49:30 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen
bjoern.michael...@canonical.com wrote:
so collecting the feedback so far, here is a proposal:
- move the gerrit mails to a separate list
- since we now have an opt-in channel, we also mail about comments to
changes
on that list, not
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 12:16:51AM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
And then people will cross-post,
Why? I dont see anyone posting to the gerrit list directly at
all. If you want you comment on that do it in a comment on gerrit
(send via email or whatever). This
Thorsten I think as well you forgot a useful feature being able to reply to
the patch sets through an email as I had previously mentioned.
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Thorsten Behrens
t...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 12:16:51AM +0200,
Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
Thorsten I think as well you forgot a useful feature being able to
reply to the patch sets through an email as I had previously
mentioned.
No. I think that's a distraction, and in any case not core to the
decision.
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
signature.asc
Description:
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Thorsten Behrens
t...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Ok - but then I see even less reason for another list, if it is
read-only. Gerrit already lets me get email for any number of events,
with filters all. So if additional action is
Hi Bjoern,
Bjoern Michaelsen píše v St 01. 05. 2013 v 21:33 +0200:
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored developer opposing to kill the
mail
spammage?
Before we go ahead with any actions here, let me explain why I think it
is good to have some sort of mails going to the ML, and what
Hi Robinson,
Robinson Tryon píše v Pá 03. 05. 2013 v 10:31 -0400:
As an alternative, we could start by providing easy instructions on
how to filter mail from gerrit.
If I just point all mail from ger...@gerrit.tdf-server-blah to
/read/me/later, does that cover it all? Is there a good,
Hi,
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 12:40:42PM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Ok - but then I see even less reason for another list, if it is
read-only. Gerrit already lets me get email for any number of events,
with filters all. So if additional action is necessary anyway -
which subscribing to a
Hi,
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 04:58:13PM +0200, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
Before we go ahead with any actions here, let me explain why I think it
is good to have some sort of mails going to the ML, and what I think is
broken at the moments.
No worries, Im drowned with work and will not suddenly
Hi Bjoern,
Bjoern Michaelsen píše v Pá 03. 05. 2013 v 18:19 +0200:
Well, yeah. And when we wait half a day, we could also collect all the
unpushed
fixes in _one_ mail and not start one thread for each. We could go fancy and
call this mail digest. ;)
Digest with N patches in a lump kills
Hi,
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 08:28:47PM +0200, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
Digest with N patches in a lump kills the possibility to scan the
content quickly, so wouldn't work for anybody, and would be just a
waste.
Hmm, it certainly would work for me, so I dont assume that to be a general
statement.
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
So removing those who are employed to work on LibreOffice -- which I
expect to be capable to set up their mail filters with a second list
or with a gerrit watch
Hi Bjoern,
well not so fast with taking away the right to opine - I would rather
like us to come to a
Hey Bjoern,
you write:
That is mostly true, but having a list has some additional advantages:
- Its an archive
- Its searchable and discoverable in google
I would hope this is true also for gerrit? ;)
- Some people dont wanna learn about gerrit and a mailing list is
something that they
Hi,
On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 12:57:46AM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
So removing those who are employed to work on LibreOffice -- which I
expect to be capable to set up their mail filters with a second list
or with a gerrit watch
well not so fast with taking away
I would be happy with a daily digest.
Next question to ask though with daily digests how many times a day will they
be sent out? would they be sent out every hour every few hours once to twice a
day?
I had once a day in my mind, but every 8 hours might be better, given the world
wide
Le 02/05/2013 07:49, Jonathan Aquilina a écrit :
If there is nothing to report is it necessary to send anything out at all?
Perhaps: if you do not receive anything, you do not know if there
nothing to receive or if there is a problem on the sender side or on the
receiver side or if the link
Hi,
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen
bjoern.michael...@canonical.com wrote:
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored developer opposing to kill the
mail
spammage? If so:
- could this be mitigated by a separate gerrit-patches mailing list?
- could this be mitigated by a
Don't u consider sending nothing to report spam in a way?
On May 2, 2013 9:42 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@sud-ouest.org
wrote:
Le 02/05/2013 07:49, Jonathan Aquilina a écrit :
If there is nothing to report is it necessary to send anything out at
all?
Perhaps: if you do not receive
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:33:49PM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Looking at:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Dev-f1639786.html
depending on time of day you find 50-90% patch mails on there. As the writer
of
mail forward I have been repeatedly asked if we can kill this spam.
I
On 01.05.2013 21:33, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored developer opposing to kill the mail
spammage? If so:
- could this be mitigated by a separate gerrit-patches mailing list?
- could this be mitigated by a daily digest of gerrit news?
- could this be
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 10:01:12PM +0200, Mat M wrote:
Yes, IMO, the goal is to have an overview of what was commited,
IMO, no, it is not. It is about seeing what is proposed to come in
*before* it does. To see stuff after the fact we have *another*
mailing list, namely
Hi,
On Thu, 02 May 2013 06:58:50 +0200
Jean-Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@sud-ouest.org wrote:
Hi,
Le 01/05/2013 21:33, Bjoern Michaelsen a écrit :
[...]
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored developer opposing to kill the
mail
spammage? If so:
[...]
Opinions?
Even
The dev-ML is to discuss code.
code come as patch, and preferably as gerrit patch... so seing the
patch that are proposed via gerrit is the core function of the ML,
just like before gerrit they where posted to the ML .
and yes I agree with Bjoern that the 'pos-facto' email are the less
Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
The dev-ML is to discuss code.
code come as patch, and preferably as gerrit patch... so seing the
patch that are proposed via gerrit is the core function of the ML,
just like before gerrit they where posted to the ML .
Yup.
If we remove all the [PATCH] from the ML,
On 02.05.2013 17:39, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
If we remove all the [PATCH] from the ML, what is left ? a
dev-discuss list ?
It is already now the case that there is a disconnect between
discussing code, or a concrete problem, and the subsequent gerrit
patch submission (case in point:
What would be nice i think is being able to respond to the patch set which
is on gerrit via email, like you can do with bugzilla no?
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Thomas Arnhold thomas-l...@arnhold.orgwrote:
On 02.05.2013 17:39, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
If we remove all the [PATCH] from the
Hi,
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:33:49PM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
depending on time of day you find 50-90% patch mails on there. As the writer
of
mail forward I have been repeatedly asked if we can kill this spam.
so collecting the feedback so far, here is a proposal:
- move the
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 05:39:56PM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Devil's advocate question: with that two-list proposal, where to
discuss a given patch? ;)
IMHO wherever the patch was proposed:
- If proposed on gerrit, it should be discussed on gerrit
- If proposed on the dev-ML, it should be
Hello all,
Le Thu, 02 May 2013 10:28:57 +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane lio...@mamane.lu
a écrit:
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 10:01:12PM +0200, Mat M wrote:
Yes, IMO, the goal is to have an overview of what was commited,
IMO, no, it is not. It is about seeing what is proposed to come in
Well,
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen
bjoern.michael...@canonical.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 09:33:49PM +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
depending on time of day you find 50-90% patch mails on there. As the writer
of
mail forward I have been repeatedly asked if we
Hi,
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 02:31:21PM -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
And I re-iterate my earlier question: what is left on the dev ML ?
chatter without patches ?
Everything but gerrit-patches. I e.g. filter out the gerrit-mails and there
stays enough on the list: Manual patches, ESC
Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 05:39:56PM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Devil's advocate question: with that two-list proposal, where to
discuss a given patch? ;)
IMHO wherever the patch was proposed:
- If proposed on gerrit, it should be discussed on gerrit
- If
Hi,
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 12:16:51AM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
That means, for everyone not wanting to miss on relevant development,
to subscribe to two lists?
It depends. You would need to subscribe to both lists, if you do not want to
miss out relevant development _by_ _mail_. You
Hi,
Looking at:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Dev-f1639786.html
depending on time of day you find 50-90% patch mails on there. As the writer of
mail forward I have been repeatedly asked if we can kill this spam.
I fully agree with this sentiment -- the dev-list should be taylored to be
Hello,
Le Wed, 01 May 2013 21:33:49 +0200, Bjoern Michaelsen
bjoern.michael...@canonical.com a écrit:
Hi,
Looking at:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Dev-f1639786.html
depending on time of day you find 50-90% patch mails on there. As the
writer of
mail forward I have been
Hi Björn,
Bjoern Michaelsen schrieb:
Hi,
Looking at:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Dev-f1639786.html
depending on time of day you find 50-90% patch mails on there. As the writer of
mail forward I have been repeatedly asked if we can kill this spam.
I fully agree with this sentiment
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen
bjoern.michael...@canonical.com wrote:
depending on time of day you find 50-90% patch mails on [the dev list]
As the writer of
mail forward I have been repeatedly asked if we can kill this spam.
I fully agree with this sentiment -- the
Hi,
Le 01/05/2013 21:33, Bjoern Michaelsen a écrit :
[...]
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored developer opposing to kill the
mail
spammage? If so:
[...]
Opinions?
Even if I am able to filter gerrit mails, I agree that a separate
gerrit-patches mailing list would be better.
+1 to JBF's suggestion usualy when i get these emails I instantly delete
them.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@sud-ouest.org
wrote:
Hi,
Le 01/05/2013 21:33, Bjoern Michaelsen a écrit :
[...]
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored developer opposing
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored developer opposing to kill the
mail spammage? If so:
- could this be mitigated by a separate gerrit-patches mailing list?
- could this be mitigated by a daily digest of gerrit news?
- could this be mitigated by other means?
I would be happy with
Next question to ask though with daily digests how many times a day will
they be sent out? would they be sent out every hour every few hours once to
twice a day?
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Winfried Donkers
w.donk...@dci-electronics.nl wrote:
So, is there anyone who is _not_ a sponsored
Next question to ask though with daily digests how many times a day will
they be sent out?
Every few hours definitely, except on Mondays of odd-numbered weeks when
the daily digest should be sent just twice. And if there is nothing to
digest, they should say so, Nothing to report.
--tml
If there is nothing to report is it necessary to send anything out at all?
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Tor Lillqvist t...@iki.fi wrote:
Next question to ask though with daily digests how many times a day will
they be sent out?
Every few hours definitely, except on Mondays of
If there is nothing to report is it necessary to send anything out at all?
Ah. Good point, I would never have thought of that!
--tml
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
What is the overall concensus here.
Daily digests of a given frequency and if there is nothing dont send out
anything?
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Tor Lillqvist t...@iki.fi wrote:
If there is nothing to report is it necessary to send anything out at all?
Ah. Good point, I would never
51 matches
Mail list logo
