19.07.2019 20:14, Sebastian Harl пишет:
What do you think is missing to make this a more compelling and
impactful proposal rather than just a "patch"?
Case 1:
I found a bug in 'virt' plugin,
https://github.com/collectd/collectd/issues/3009
You try to implement feature named "code owner".
As per 'CODEOWNERS' file, @anaudx and @rjablonx are responsible persons
about 'virt' plugin.
As codeowners, they must solve the problem? Or not? How much time do
they have?
What is the penalty for breaking the deadlines?
Case 2:
https://github.com/collectd/collectd/pull/2891
Some guys wrote their code and publish PR.
You try to implement feature named "code owner".
With new 'CODEOWNERS' policy, they could merge it w/o outside review.
Please look, how much code was revorked after my review.
Unfortunately, IIRC, not all nits was fixed.
Do you really think you will get better code when these guys will simply
merge code w/o any outside review?
Case 3:
Maintainer merged #3072 . This action breaks CI in master branch.
Who is responsible on recovering CI checks on master branch?
What actions should be taken and by whom?
Case 4:
CI checks continuously fails on clang-format.
For some unknown reason, rules of checking was changed and
previously-formatted files needs to be reformatted again.
Who is responsible on resolving this clang-format check bug?
Don't say me "code needs to be re-formatted again", that is wrong.
Case 5:
CI checks continuously hangs.
Latest example https://github.com/collectd/collectd/pull/3207 with
developer comment.
Who is responsible on resolving this issue?
-----
But you, of course, can continue work on your comfortable Google-Docs
documents instead of returning to earth.
_______________________________________________
collectd mailing list
collectd@verplant.org
https://mailman.verplant.org/listinfo/collectd
