Question do you guys have some tinder boxes that will auto build each commit 
and if they fail a report is emailed notifying that there are failures. I am 
very willing to sponsor a server

Sent from my iPhone

> On 29 May 2018, at 05:40, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 28 May 2018 16:05:11 -0400 "William L. Thomson Jr."
> <[email protected]> said:
> 
>> On Mon, 28 May 2018 19:55:55 +0200
>> Marcel Hollerbach <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> D6224, D6223, D6222 are fixing the issue. (Or at least the cases i
>>> have seen).
>>> 
>>> However, could you stop acting up like this & writing mails like
>>> this? 
>> 
>> Maybe there needs to be more so others do not do such things?
> 
> will - i know we have our differences... but you hit the nail on the head
> here. :)
> 
>>> The lifetime of eo objects have been quite a mess, this branch
>>> brought a bit light into the dark, it was not perfect how it came,
>>> sure, 
>> 
>> I think all should focus more on the breakage than the reaction.
> 
> absolutely. i tried to make it clear it wasn't personal and i was focusing on
> the breakage and a solution (either solve without revert or a revert needed). 
> i
> also anted to point out that commits of this nature in large batches when it
> becomes "unibsectable" have horrible knock-on effects to other people trying 
> to
> fix it and as daniel points out too - in future digging through history to 
> find
> the commit that changed something now has to skip this entire batch. this is
> not good to have in our history.
> 
>> Breaking things is bad m'kay... A few have reported breakage already.
>> That never reflects well on a project much less any TEAM.
> 
> correct. someone did a bad play... it's being pointed out and i'm airing 2
> solutions with a deadline (for now). one of the solutions is mine (revert) and
> is not pretty.
> 
>>> however here it is. Further more, you claim that this is not
>>> personal, why was it then not enough to create a ticket, or simply a
>>> revert revision to discuss things? 
>> 
>> It seemed like considerable time was spent trying to find a commit to
>> revert or a a series. How much time should another spend? Should things
>> be broken like this in the first place? With several reporting
>> breakage already, and more likely to experience such.
>> 
>>> Doing patches in EFL had always a  team flavor for me, mails like
>>> this are destroying that feeling. So in the end: Could we stop this
>>> stupid blame team and start to act as a team again?
>> 
>> Dropping a series of some 121 commits at once does not seem to team
>> friendly to me. Unless the work is perfect or well tested and
>> reviewed. There was already a discussion on reviews. If you say 1 minute
>> per commit, that is 2 hours of review... If there is a discussion on
>> any or needs testing modification etc. You are talking many hours...
> 
> 1 minute is not a review. a proper review of a patch takes at least on average
> i'd say 30-60min. some can be 5-10min (i include apply, compile and run here 
> on
> a fast machine) others need deep reading of a large diff. that can take hours
> depending on diff size of course.
> 
>> Not to mention with a upcoming release. Unless a bunch of stuff was
>> broken and this fixes all that. Then really should be less than more.
>> Every fix could potentially break something else. This seems like it
>> caused way more issues than it fixed. Hard to defend.
> 
> indeed. nail. head.
> 
>> I think the reaction of waiting a few days and giving the author and
>> TEAM a chance to fix is more than adequate and being overly nice. Not
>> to mention effort put forth to fix, revert, etc already. I would not
>> have been surprised if the commits were reverted right away. But a more
>> diplomatic approach was taken. That is nice enough IMHO.
> 
> i tried. :) a combo of work needed to revert + possible value+gains within the
> patch series vs "badness of results post patch" made me take this path.
> 
>> People really need to get thick skin again. Its ok for a team member or
>> project lead to be harsh on others for things. Surely for large patch
>> sets and breaking stuff.... I have seen others lose it in public venues
>> over much less... This being overly nice is why stuff like this can
>> happen and others think its ok. I think the reaction would change
>> things so such does not happen again. Then no reaction, no problem.
> 
> i did try and be nice... as i value the work put in and cedric's time and
> effort etc. etc. and i'm trying to offer a reasonable reaction and solutions 
> to
> this. if any kind of identification of patches in future is seen as bad and
> cannot be done, then i suspect this will be dysfunctional as it can get as you
> have to tiptoe around everything you say or do. you can never point at any
> code lest it perhaps identify a person and make them feel bad. 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
> Carsten Haitzler - [email protected]
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> enlightenment-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to