Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

well, I'm not prepared to pass commit procedures, I'm awaiting for Samuli response whether or not he can handle those if I will send patches directly to him Well, if the patches would be 100% perfect all the time I probably would not mind relaying them to the list. However, in that case you

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 04:25:26PM +0500, ?? wrote: > the point is "if there were PR ... and some friendly developers behaviour", > so that issue wouldn't get lost "in mailing list archives" > > currently, it was definitely lost. nobody knows where it is Of course I

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

HI, On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Илья Шипицин wrote: > it is already running at "coverity_scan" branch: > https://travis-ci.org/OpenVPN/openvpn/builds/120718429 > > so, it definitely good Well, "it seems to work" is one thing, but a review should also cover whether

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

the point is "if there were PR ... and some friendly developers behaviour", so that issue wouldn't get lost "in mailing list archives" currently, it was definitely lost. nobody knows where it is 2016-05-02 16:17 GMT+05:00 Gert Doering : > Hi, > > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

ok, we are running 1000+ users installation, just couple of them experienced that behaviour. and, after I investigated it in details, I came to uninitilized variable (which by chance was "almost always" initialized with NULL) from that point of view, 2 out of 1000 is almost nothing and I could

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 04:14:23PM +0500, ?? wrote: > I was very disapointed with what happened to my report in mailing list. So, > I will not send anything to list until things will change. Or I will ask > Samuli to do so. If I remember right, you got a clear response

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

ok, I sent to list bug report, it was somewhere on windows 8.1 beta. somehow, uninitialized variables were initialized with garbage (it was fixed to NULL in windows 8.1 release) bug is there https://github.com/OpenVPN/openvpn/blob/master/src/openvpn/error.c#L458 if std_redir is defined, so

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 03:58:25PM +0500, ?? wrote: > well, I'm not prepared to pass commit procedures, I'm awaiting for Samuli > response whether or not he can handle those if I will send patches directly > to him Feel free to use PRs to *discuss* patches (I already

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

well, I'm not prepared to pass commit procedures, I'm awaiting for Samuli response whether or not he can handle those if I will send patches directly to him 2016-05-02 15:56 GMT+05:00 Gert Doering : > Hi, > > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 03:54:46PM +0500, ??

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 03:54:46PM +0500, ?? wrote: > there's nothing to be afraid of. > > http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/importing/import_projects_from_github.html > > we can export all issues, pr, whatever from github to gitlab if github will > decide to follow

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 03:51:06PM +0500, ?? wrote: > if we would have been using PR, anyone would be able to have a look at > single place and find opened PRs. And what will he or she learn from that? > can you find unmerged patches ? Yes. (But it does not really

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

there's nothing to be afraid of. http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/importing/import_projects_from_github.html we can export all issues, pr, whatever from github to gitlab if github will decide to follow code.google.com 2016-05-02 15:09 GMT+05:00 Gert Doering : > Hi, > > On

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

if we would have been using PR, anyone would be able to have a look at single place and find opened PRs. can you find unmerged patches ? 2016-05-02 15:46 GMT+05:00 Gert Doering : > Hi > > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 03:19:54PM +0500, ?? wrote: > > when

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 03:19:54PM +0500, ?? wrote: > when using mailing list there's no way to clearly determine what was done > and needs to pay attention to. > > and people get disappointed "I sent a patch and nothing happened" > > how that is supposed to work in

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

when using mailing list there's no way to clearly determine what was done and needs to pay attention to. and people get disappointed "I sent a patch and nothing happened" how that is supposed to work in mailing list paradigma? 2016-05-02 15:09 GMT+05:00 Gert Doering : >

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 02:55:52PM +0500, ?? wrote: > sf.net mailing list can go away as well. > I do not see why relying on sf.net is any better than relying on github.com It isn't. Thus, we do not rely on sf.net - the mailing list archive is referenced only at

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

sf.net mailing list can go away as well. I do not see why relying on sf.net is any better than relying on github.com 2016-05-02 14:47 GMT+05:00 Gert Doering : > Hi, > > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 12:02:37PM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > > At minimum we should clearly state

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hi, On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 12:02:37PM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > At minimum we should clearly state why we prefer email patches > over GitHub PRs. Then revisit the arguments every now and then, and > adapt as necessary. "Our workflow relies on public availability of patch and ACK,

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

it is already running at "coverity_scan" branch: https://travis-ci.org/OpenVPN/openvpn/builds/120718429 so, it definitely good however, I would add (to make build running on ubuntu trusty) sudo: required dist: trusty 2016-05-02 13:59 GMT+05:00 Samuli Seppänen : > > On Mon,

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

It seems, patches are often lost "somewhere in mailing list archives" Indeed, because we've been unable to process them in time. And there is no fully automated system to show what the patch status is. I still have no idea why this way of distributing patches is prefferable over native

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Samuli Seppänen wrote: 1) add travis-ci support (there are few tests in "t" and we can run cppcheck) I assume cppcheck produces the same results regardless of the OS/distribution it is running on. If this is the case, then we should add

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

It seems, patches are often lost "somewhere in mailing list archives" I still have no idea why this way of distributing patches is prefferable over native github PRs 2 мая 2016 г. 12:55 пользователь "Steffan Karger" написал: On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Samuli Seppänen

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > >> 1) add travis-ci support (there are few tests in "t" and we can run >> cppcheck) > > I assume cppcheck produces the same results regardless of the > OS/distribution it is running on. If this is the case, then we

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

I can prepare .travis.yml for openvpn, however, I'm not prepared for "pack your commit so and so... We are short on time to merge it" Is it ok if I send .travis.yml to you? Can you proceed with commit/review procedure? 2 мая 2016 г. 12:44 пользователь "Samuli Seppänen"

Re: [Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hello, I just run cppcheck and ... [src/openvpnserv/interactive.c:601]: (error) Memory pointed to by 'addr_row' is freed twice. [src/openvpnserv/interactive.c:700]: (error) Memory pointed to by 'fwd_row' is freed twice. [src/openvpnserv/interactive.c:1329]: (error) Common realloc mistake:

[Openvpn-devel] CI for openvpn

Hello, I just run cppcheck and ... [src/openvpnserv/interactive.c:601]: (error) Memory pointed to by 'addr_row' is freed twice. [src/openvpnserv/interactive.c:700]: (error) Memory pointed to by 'fwd_row' is freed twice. [src/openvpnserv/interactive.c:1329]: (error) Common realloc mistake: