notmuch-next branch

2010-10-13 Thread Sebastian Spaeth
> I'd be glad to host something on notmuchmail.org too.
> 
> I suppose I should just set that up...

+1 which would make it easier to find for new users. Who would have
push rights? (not me).

Sebastian


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-13 Thread Sebastian Spaeth
 I'd be glad to host something on notmuchmail.org too.
 
 I suppose I should just set that up...

+1 which would make it easier to find for new users. Who would have
push rights? (not me).

Sebastian
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-12 Thread David Bremner
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:19:35 -0700, Carl Worth  wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras  gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
> > gitorious (please vote).
> 
> I'd be glad to host something on notmuchmail.org too.
> 
> I suppose I should just set that up...
> 

+1 for carl just setting that up :)

d


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-12 Thread Carl Worth
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras  wrote:
> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
> gitorious (please vote).

I'd be glad to host something on notmuchmail.org too.

I suppose I should just set that up...

-Carl
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20101012/579786a8/attachment.pgp>


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-12 Thread Sebastian Spaeth
On 2010-10-11, Jesse Rosenthal wrote:
> I don't know how official this has to be -- just an agreed upon branch
> that people keep around next to their own personal one. Sebastian used
> to have one that served this purpose a while back, I think.

Well, it wasn't really semi-official or even blessed, I just announced
it loudest :-). Meanwhile, I don't feel like maintaining my own notmuch
anymore. I am still using it though and would love to follow someone's
branch :-).

Sebastian


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-12 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Jameson Rollins
 wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras  gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
>> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
>> gitorious (please vote).
>>
>> More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
>> guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
>> signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
>> pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
>> but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
>> are the people to have write access.
>
> I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
> need a single central repo that multiple people need access to. ?The
> whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
> for a central repo.

And yet, git is hosted in a central repo. Different projects have
different needs, and this one seems to need a place to cook up
patches, having multiple committers there seems like it would work.
Note that this wouldn't be the main repo, it would be preparing stage.

> In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
> into a "next" branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
> ever they want, and then every body can just keep their "next" branches
> synced with each other. ?As consensus is reached, the next release will
> emerge.

That might also work, it would be the first project I see doing that
though. But what I worry is the ordering of the patches; we might have
applied the same patches, but they would appear as totally different
branches to a 3rd party, and of course merging other people's 'next'
branches would create a total mess. There should be one repo that has
the latest and greatest 'next' branch that everybody can rebase into,
like the current 'master'.

-- 
Felipe Contreras


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-12 Thread Sebastian Spaeth
On 2010-10-11, Jesse Rosenthal wrote:
 I don't know how official this has to be -- just an agreed upon branch
 that people keep around next to their own personal one. Sebastian used
 to have one that served this purpose a while back, I think.

Well, it wasn't really semi-official or even blessed, I just announced
it loudest :-). Meanwhile, I don't feel like maintaining my own notmuch
anymore. I am still using it though and would love to follow someone's
branch :-).

Sebastian
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-12 Thread Carl Worth
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras 
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
 I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
 gitorious (please vote).

I'd be glad to host something on notmuchmail.org too.

I suppose I should just set that up...

-Carl


pgp5KIeDjUuhO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-12 Thread David Bremner
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 16:19:35 -0700, Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org wrote:
 On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras 
 felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
  I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
  gitorious (please vote).
 
 I'd be glad to host something on notmuchmail.org too.
 
 I suppose I should just set that up...
 

+1 for carl just setting that up :)

d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Amit Kucheria
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Jameson Rollins
 wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras  gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
>> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
>> gitorious (please vote).
>>
>> More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
>> guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
>> signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
>> pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
>> but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
>> are the people to have write access.
>
> I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
> need a single central repo that multiple people need access to. ?The
> whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
> for a central repo.

While distributed development is good, it would be nice for users to
be able to clone one git repo instead of tracking 5 different trees.
And more users typically means more robust software.

It would also make it easier to merge patches back into notmuch-master
if it ever takes off again.

> In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
> into a "next" branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
> ever they want, and then every body can just keep their "next" branches
> synced with each other. ?As consensus is reached, the next release will
> emerge.

Everyone can still maintain their own trees. Patches can go into the
'-next' repo only after being ack'ed by 1-2 active developers on the
mailing list. Meanwhile they bake in personal trees.

/Amit


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Jed Brown
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 22:00, Jameson Rollins
 wrote:
> As long as all the repos are synced, then you only need to track one.
> But notmuch already has "official" repos [0], and making another
> pseudo-"official" repo will probably just makes things more confusing.

Patches show up in a different order in each person's "personal, but
'synced'" repository.  Then you need a mess of merges to actually get
them synced (if they are published, you can't rebase).

Jed


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
Hi,

I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
gitorious (please vote).

More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
are the people to have write access.

Also, we need to agree which patches to start with and how. One
proposal would be to propose and vote here, another would be to resend
them and wait for signed-off-by's.

What do you think?

-- 
Felipe Contreras


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Kristoffer Ström
> What do you think?

Good idea. github+


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Jesse Rosenthal

On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 22:10:24 +0200, Jed Brown  wrote:
> Patches show up in a different order in each person's "personal, but
> 'synced'" repository.  Then you need a mess of merges to actually get
> them synced (if they are published, you can't rebase).

I'd add, by way of voting for something a bit more central, that it
would be very hard to offer support to new users over IRC or the list,
if there wasn't some brancha franca. Any problems they might have could
be traced to some patch in whatever repo they pulled from, and everyone
on the channel would, in order to help, be clamoring to have them pull
from this or that repo.

I don't know how official this has to be -- just an agreed upon branch
that people keep around next to their own personal one. Sebastian used
to have one that served this purpose a while back, I think.

None of this means that people couldn't publish their own -- but that
there was one, run probably by a team, to serve as a point of a
reference.

--Jesse


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Jameson Rollins
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 22:40:52 +0300, Amit Kucheria  wrote:
> While distributed development is good, it would be nice for users to
> be able to clone one git repo instead of tracking 5 different trees.
> And more users typically means more robust software.

As long as all the repos are synced, then you only need to track one.
But notmuch already has "official" repos [0], and making another
pseudo-"official" repo will probably just makes things more confusing.

jamie.

[0] git://notmuchmail.org/git/notmuch
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 



notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Jameson Rollins
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras  wrote:
> I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
> gitorious (please vote).
> 
> More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
> guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
> signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
> pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
> but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
> are the people to have write access.

I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
need a single central repo that multiple people need access to.  The
whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
for a central repo.

In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
into a "next" branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
ever they want, and then every body can just keep their "next" branches
synced with each other.  As consensus is reached, the next release will
emerge.

jamie.
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/attachments/20101011/b1e06538/attachment.pgp>


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Servilio Afre Puentes
On 11 October 2010 14:45, Felipe Contreras  
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
> gitorious (please vote).

+1 for gitorious, you can use OpenID and their code is available (for
me a sign of more faith in free software than the Github people).

An alternative would be to have a list of git branches in the wiki,
with description, clone URL, etc.

Servilio


notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
Hi,

I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
gitorious (please vote).

More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
are the people to have write access.

Also, we need to agree which patches to start with and how. One
proposal would be to propose and vote here, another would be to resend
them and wait for signed-off-by's.

What do you think?

-- 
Felipe Contreras
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Servilio Afre Puentes
On 11 October 2010 14:45, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
 I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
 gitorious (please vote).

+1 for gitorious, you can use OpenID and their code is available (for
me a sign of more faith in free software than the Github people).

An alternative would be to have a list of git branches in the wiki,
with description, clone URL, etc.

Servilio
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Jameson Rollins
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras 
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
 I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
 I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
 gitorious (please vote).
 
 More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
 guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
 signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
 pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
 but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
 are the people to have write access.

I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
need a single central repo that multiple people need access to.  The
whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
for a central repo.

In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
into a next branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
ever they want, and then every body can just keep their next branches
synced with each other.  As consensus is reached, the next release will
emerge.

jamie.


pgpovYSewcW0N.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Servilio Afre Puentes
On 11 October 2010 15:01, Jameson Rollins jroll...@finestructure.net wrote:
 On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras 
 felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
 I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
 I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
 gitorious (please vote).

 More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
 guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
 signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
 pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
 but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
 are the people to have write access.

 I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
 need a single central repo that multiple people need access to.  The
 whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
 for a central repo.

 In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
 into a next branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
 ever they want, and then every body can just keep their next branches
 synced with each other.  As consensus is reached, the next release will
 emerge.

+1 and maintaining a list of these repos in the wiki ;)

Servilio
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Jed Brown
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 22:00, Jameson Rollins
jroll...@finestructure.net wrote:
 As long as all the repos are synced, then you only need to track one.
 But notmuch already has official repos [0], and making another
 pseudo-official repo will probably just makes things more confusing.

Patches show up in a different order in each person's personal, but
'synced' repository.  Then you need a mess of merges to actually get
them synced (if they are published, you can't rebase).

Jed
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch


Re: notmuch-next branch

2010-10-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Jameson Rollins
jroll...@finestructure.net wrote:
 On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras 
 felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
 I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So
 I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or
 gitorious (please vote).

 More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some
 guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be
 signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before
 pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works,
 but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who
 are the people to have write access.

 I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we
 need a single central repo that multiple people need access to.  The
 whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need
 for a central repo.

And yet, git is hosted in a central repo. Different projects have
different needs, and this one seems to need a place to cook up
patches, having multiple committers there seems like it would work.
Note that this wouldn't be the main repo, it would be preparing stage.

 In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in
 into a next branch in their own personal repos, publish them where
 ever they want, and then every body can just keep their next branches
 synced with each other.  As consensus is reached, the next release will
 emerge.

That might also work, it would be the first project I see doing that
though. But what I worry is the ordering of the patches; we might have
applied the same patches, but they would appear as totally different
branches to a 3rd party, and of course merging other people's 'next'
branches would create a total mess. There should be one repo that has
the latest and greatest 'next' branch that everybody can rebase into,
like the current 'master'.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch