Hi,
On 15-02-16 14:15, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 7:57 AM, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi,
On 15-02-16 13:47, Josh Boyer wrote:
<snip>
While I'm still very much on the fence about this, moving to pagure
for dist-git might very much help in these situations. Being able to
send a pull request with your changes easily means you've fixed it,
the maintainer just needs to pull it in. All of the information is
contained within that pull request. It would seem to solve many of
our communication issues.
I do not think that adding a pull-req to the process of proven packager
commits is really helpful. To me this feels like adding unnecessary red-tape
in a response to one are two cases where a provenpackager commit was
not 100% to the liking of the maintainer.
How many proven packager commits do we have a day / a week ? And how
much of those lead to "raised eyebrows" of the official package
maintainer ?
I think that with things like broken deps due to soname bumps +
mass-rebuild failures having proven=packagers help out is 99.9%
of the time very welcome help. I certainly always value such help
with my packages.
So they can continue. I don't see why having pagure precludes them
from carrying on as normal. YOu can even have "just commit, don't
send me pull requests" in the pagure repo info.
Ok, then I'm fine with it.
Both as a maintainer (having to respond to pull-reqs means extra work)
and as a proven packager I'm not in favor of adding this extra red-tape.
Why do people assume every change is going to be 100% mandatory for
everyone all the time? I never said that.
I know you didn't say that I was just trying to pre-empt this possibly
becoming a mandatory thing.
<snip>
If nobody else cares about this, then fine. I'm not demanding it.
I'm simply suggesting it as a solution
I agree this maybe useful for some work flows, and people used to
the github workflow will likely like this, so if people want to work
on this as an extra option then I'm all for it.
> to the problem clearly highlighted in this thread.
I'm not sure there really is such a problem, which is exactly why
I replied. Yes there was a communication hiccup, those happen, but as
I said in my initial reply, how many provenpackager commits a day / week
do we have, and how often do we get such a communication hiccup ?
(Honest) Mistakes will always happen, we simply cannot "regulate"
mistakes away completely and trying to do so will just result
in needlessly complex procedures.
Regards,
Hans
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
