Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 03:06:00PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: I agree. Given your limited computing power, you are the very last person who should be running Patchy. It is not just my computing resources that make me unsuitable. I was tactfully not mentioning the other part. :) you'll see that I am also damaging the project by alienating new contributors. Actually, we _should_ be alienating new contributors. At least, new programming contributors. Anything else is dishonest and unfair to them. I disagree that alienating them as a purpose would be either honest or fair. The point is more like _warning_ them. Something like: Large companies tend to be organized like termite colonies: everything revolves around the master mind who, with a body inflated a thousandfold, can no longer leave the building and is catered for by layers of personnel who deal with the outer world, bring food and only escalate problems they don't know how to deal with themselves. The outer layer tends to have no clue whatsoever, but is polite and encouraging, so that the customer (the most common problem) figures out himself what was wrong, without feeling all too bad about possibly aggravating or abusing the support person. Now we are more organized like bees. The queens are actually distinguished by being the ones able to sting more than once. And you don't need to consult multiple layers to get an escalation to qualified personnel. You'll likely get an escalation before asking for it. Well, you may have been asking for it, but not necessarily on purpose. I am not good at this, I am afraid. Somebody else better explain that. (we still need more admin people, though, in order to smooth out the process of programming such that we can eventually be fair to new programmers) What's being unfair? Everybody gets the same treatment. Except, of course, that they don't have the option to just bypass procedures and push. So in order to stop damaging the project, I will stop doing any reviews except on patches of myself: I am getting paid for work on LilyPond, and it would not be conscionable for me to forego those parts of general work required to let my own work go forward. Please keep on reviewing -- at least, review to the extent of you haven't fixed everything. or problems in x, y, and z. I'm not asking you to give any details, I'm not asking you to repeat yourself, and I'm certainly not asking you to be nice to patch submitters. But we really need to stop questionable patches getting into lilypond -- you know this even better than I. I am afraid that you overestimate what I have been doing. I've been running test-patches and looking at pretty pictures. The only advantage I have over a trained monkey that I may be saying no more often than merely this looks fishy, and that I may be saying this looks fishy more often than thinking something to be totally irrelevant. It's my job to think ahead of people. I told Janek in January that he should not try to recruit anybody unless he was going to take care of them, because it would end badly. I disagree. The problem is more that it would _start_ badly. Now if you take a look at our code base and documentation, it is pretty much unavoidable that it starts badly with regard to being in smooth sailing waters concerning technical matters. And it is going to last a few years. So if you are easily frustrated, you are not likely to stay around all that long. If you are not easily frustrated, you have a chance to stick around until you start seeing some good things not just in the program itself, but also in other developers, and even in some of our procedures and infrastructure. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 10:07:32AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: I am afraid that you overestimate what I have been doing. I've been running test-patches and looking at pretty pictures. You've done more than that; you occasionally say this looks like a silly design or why not do XYZ instead. You say that quite often after patches are accepted and you're trying to work on that area of code, but you still catch some of those problems during the review. That's what I'm asking you to do. I'm not asking you to look at the pretty pictures; don't look at any patch until somebody has signed off on those pretty pictures. That was the whole point of Patchy, after all! I don't want to waste developers' time by looking at patches which have easily-found problems like regtest comparisons. But after that's done -- after a patch has passed Patchy and is on a countdown -- then please look at the patch, and ask yourself if I had to fix a bug or add a feature to this part of the code base, would that change make my work easier or harder?. - Graham ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 07:17:06AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: It is close to two months that I have been the only person running test-patches, even though several volunteers claimed they would do so. It has been the main reason I shelled out €20 for a week of internet access during my spring vacation. And to add insult to injury, people don't even run make check on submitted patches even if they are _supposed_ to change the typeset result. I agree. Given your limited computing power, you are the very last person who should be running Patchy. It is not just my computing resources that make me unsuitable. If you check up on URL:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.devel/46346, you'll see that I am also damaging the project by alienating new contributors. I quote: For me it sounds like blaming me that I'm a beginner developer on Lilypond project, so my work isn't as optimized as it should be. It's not nice for me, really, and it doesn't encourage me to submit my patches either. So in order to stop damaging the project, I will stop doing any reviews except on patches of myself: I am getting paid for work on LilyPond, and it would not be conscionable for me to forego those parts of general work required to let my own work go forward. If there are any new contributors who want to get reviews, they will be turned away disappointed. They are already turning away disappointed because of having gotten reviews, so there is no change in that department. PS if you want to run Patchy on your own patches, then by all means do so. But please refuse to check other people's patches, no matter how urgent the bug or how much the contributor pleads for reviews. I see you are thinking ahead of me again. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 03:06:00PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: I agree. Given your limited computing power, you are the very last person who should be running Patchy. It is not just my computing resources that make me unsuitable. I was tactfully not mentioning the other part. :) you'll see that I am also damaging the project by alienating new contributors. Actually, we _should_ be alienating new contributors. At least, new programming contributors. Anything else is dishonest and unfair to them. (we still need more admin people, though, in order to smooth out the process of programming such that we can eventually be fair to new programmers) So in order to stop damaging the project, I will stop doing any reviews except on patches of myself: I am getting paid for work on LilyPond, and it would not be conscionable for me to forego those parts of general work required to let my own work go forward. Please keep on reviewing -- at least, review to the extent of you haven't fixed everything. or problems in x, y, and z. I'm not asking you to give any details, I'm not asking you to repeat yourself, and I'm certainly not asking you to be nice to patch submitters. But we really need to stop questionable patches getting into lilypond -- you know this even better than I. PS if you want to run Patchy on your own patches, then by all means do so. But please refuse to check other people's patches, no matter how urgent the bug or how much the contributor pleads for reviews. I see you are thinking ahead of me again. It's my job to think ahead of people. I told Janek in January that he should not try to recruit anybody unless he was going to take care of them, because it would end badly. - Graham ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: It is close to two months that I have been the only person running test-patches, even though several volunteers claimed they would do so. It has been the main reason I shelled out €20 for a week of internet access during my spring vacation. My limited computing resources mean that I have to take every shortcut I can to get this reasonably done. It is a bottleneck of development. My shortcuts tend to lead to erroneous data for making decisions, cf URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2468#c25, and thus can alienate developers and cause unnecessary delays and hickups. It also means that I can spare no flexibility for dealing with things like submissions not following the rules URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2480, again possibly alienating developers instead of getting them more smoothly into our procedures. And to add insult to injury, people don't even run make check on submitted patches even if they are _supposed_ to change the typeset result. Instead they fly by wire and rely on me checking and reporting the differences. And then speculate about the description instead of looking themselves. Yesterday evening I have checked two contributions by different contributors, and both showed _extensive_ bad changes. Running make check is not all that expensive if you have reasonably up to date hardware. Certainly cheaper than running Patchy. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 07:17:06AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: It is close to two months that I have been the only person running test-patches, even though several volunteers claimed they would do so. It has been the main reason I shelled out €20 for a week of internet access during my spring vacation. And to add insult to injury, people don't even run make check on submitted patches even if they are _supposed_ to change the typeset result. I agree. Given your limited computing power, you are the very last person who should be running Patchy. Please stop doing so. We will let submitted patches accumulate without reviews until somebody else starts doing this. If there are any more Critical issues, then of course this will delay 2.16. If there are any new contributors who want to get reviews, they will be turned away disappointed. If Janek starts submitting patches, they will go without review and will not be pushed. We have tried a soft approach to get volunteers for this vital task. It's time to take a hard approach. - Graham PS if you want to run Patchy on your own patches, then by all means do so. But please refuse to check other people's patches, no matter how urgent the bug or how much the contributor pleads for reviews. ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
What's with the test-patches volunteers?
It is close to two months that I have been the only person running test-patches, even though several volunteers claimed they would do so. It has been the main reason I shelled out €20 for a week of internet access during my spring vacation. My limited computing resources mean that I have to take every shortcut I can to get this reasonably done. It is a bottleneck of development. My shortcuts tend to lead to erroneous data for making decisions, cf URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2468#c25, and thus can alienate developers and cause unnecessary delays and hickups. It also means that I can spare no flexibility for dealing with things like submissions not following the rules URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2480, again possibly alienating developers instead of getting them more smoothly into our procedures. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
- Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 7:31 AM Subject: What's with the test-patches volunteers? It is close to two months that I have been the only person running test-patches, even though several volunteers claimed they would do so. It has been the main reason I shelled out €20 for a week of internet access during my spring vacation. My limited computing resources mean that I have to take every shortcut I can to get this reasonably done. It is a bottleneck of development. My shortcuts tend to lead to erroneous data for making decisions, cf URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2468#c25, and thus can alienate developers and cause unnecessary delays and hickups. It also means that I can spare no flexibility for dealing with things like submissions not following the rules URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2480, again possibly alienating developers instead of getting them more smoothly into our procedures. -- David Kastrup = I think Marek was looking at doing this? Paging Marek? -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
On 12-04-22 03:57 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: - Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 7:31 AM Subject: What's with the test-patches volunteers? It is close to two months that I have been the only person running test-patches, even though several volunteers claimed they would do so. It has been the main reason I shelled out €20 for a week of internet access during my spring vacation. My home machine stays powered and idle, except for BOINC, while I'm at the office. With a bit of a leg up, I can help out by way of a cron job. Cheers, Colin Senex -- I've learned that you shouldn't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both hands. You need to be able to throw something back. -Maya Angelou, poet (1928- ) ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: What's with the test-patches volunteers?
Hello, On 22 April 2012 16:00, Colin Campbell c...@shaw.ca wrote: On 12-04-22 03:57 AM, Phil Holmes wrote: - Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 7:31 AM Subject: What's with the test-patches volunteers? It is close to two months that I have been the only person running test-patches, even though several volunteers claimed they would do so. It has been the main reason I shelled out €20 for a week of internet access during my spring vacation. My home machine stays powered and idle, except for BOINC, while I'm at the office. With a bit of a leg up, I can help out by way of a cron job. This isn't 'that' patchy - you cannot really cron it Needs a bit of human input. http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/patchy Specifically - test-patches.py: I already run lilypond-patchy-staging.py on my machine, you don't need to worry about that so much. Graham calls it all 'patchy' - I like to think of them as Brother and Sister. ;) Patchy and Patchita chuckle James ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
