Great proposal from Max to skip CQ for Eclipse committers. It does not make sense that I can commit 100 000 lines to PDE but not 1001 to another project I'm not a committer for.
Max, can you bring your proposal to the board? Best regards, Lars Am 20.11.2015 9:00 vorm. schrieb "Max Rydahl Andersen" <[email protected] >: > On 19 Nov 2015, at 11:17, Ed Merks wrote: > > Recall that this was increased from 250 to 1000 not so long ago. I wasn't >> able to push the IP committee beyond that. People working for an >> organization that has a corporate representative on the board could ask >> that representative to raise this issue at a board meeting. I think that >> would carry more weight than me personally asking for a further increase. >> > > In this case it looks like a broken notification - good it was found and > identified. > > I can personally vouch that the 1000 line limit have directly taken part > in why I have stopped contributing to i.e. mylyndoc asciidoc support. Here > I spent several weekends and eventually months on getting basic > contributions in that was *obviously* not in any danger of having IP > conflicts since the code was copied from mylyn.doc itself and 100% written > by me - still I had to play the game of splitting up contributions and in > the end just stop doing it. (mylyn.doc could fix this by making me a > committer or eclipse foundation allow contributions from other eclipse > committers without CQ review - but that is just examples of more process > dancing) > > Thus this really is an issue and something I raised to IP and Legal team > several time in the pass - issue is that from their perspective they don't > get to see the times a committer is asked to split a contribution up; they > just see the +1000 lines ones and think they are fast to get it though the > system. > > But If I have to wait 2 weeks between contributions for things that are > not on my critical path I just cannot afford spending time on it - > especially if I have interest in building on top of these contributions. > And I'm actually a believer in doing things right at eclipse - but I can > just imagine those coming from the outside just never show up or just leave > immediately. > > But to the point on raising this to the IP committee and the board. > > If you get caught in similar dead or live-locks in the IP system or see > another attempt on having to split up otherwise perfect valid > contributions, please consider forwarding me info personally ( > [email protected]). > > I would like to be able to show to IP committee and board how often this > is actually hurting us - or on the flip side, be convinced that is not > actually that big an issue. > > Thanks, > /max > > >> >> On 19/11/2015 11:00 AM, Ed Willink wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> Presumably you put tests in a separate plugin, so splitting off the >>> tests as a separate contribution gets you twice the limit with minimal >>> effort. >>> >>> Perhaps a 10000 line limit might be appropriate for non-deliverable code >>> such as tests and build tools. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Ed Willink >>> >>> >>> >>> On 19/11/2015 09:49, Sievers, Jan wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> in the course of >>>> >>>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=477328 >>>> >>>> >>>> we had a contribution that slightly exceeded 1000 lines and thus needed >>>> a CQ. >>>> It took about one month to review it. >>>> >>>> I am sure the legal team does its very best to keep up with the load, >>>> so the following is in no way a criticism of the >>>> people who actually do the legal review. >>>> >>>> Rather take it as food for thought to whoever set up this rule. >>>> >>>> IMHO the 1000 line rule is effectively setting the wrong incentives for >>>> a thriving opensource project. >>>> >>>> Here is why I think so: >>>> >>>> >>>> The most diligent contributors add a lot of tests to their patch to >>>> prove it works. >>>> This is a good thing and we actively encourage contributors to >>>> thoroughly test. >>>> Test code can easily outweigh productive code being tested in terms of >>>> LOC. >>>> However this means the most diligent contributors, i.e. the ones you >>>> want to attract, are more likely to hit the 1000 line limit. >>>> Instead of thanking them for their hard work, we effectively punish >>>> them with an extra month or more wait time before their patch can be >>>> merged. >>>> Apart from that, the 1000 line limit seems arbitrary to me because >>>> technically you can split up any commit into any number >>>> of smaller commits below the 1000 line limit. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Jan >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe >>>> from this list, visit >>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe >>> from this list, visit >>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe >> from this list, visit >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev >> > > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > _______________________________________________ > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > [email protected] > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe > from this list, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev >
_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
