On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 15:49 +0000, Ivan Vučica wrote: > I think it would be worth reviewing this code. If you agree, I'd love > a patch series applied on top of a particular Subversion commit > (possibly published as a series of Git commits on top of a mirror > created by Gregory). Each patch should tackle one self-contained task > ("git add -i" is awesome). Alternatively, each Git branch should > tackle one task, and could be collapsed into a single patch (i.e. > Subversion commit).
I like the idea of linking git commits to self-contained tasks. In fact, is the strategy I use for all my repos, both personal and professional (in this case, we do SCRUM, and each commit should reference a bug/task/improvement ticket). Bundling a bunch of changes of a branch into a single one doesn't sound as good, though. That could only mean that you have a really broken commit policy for your git repo, and that you need this to make some sense of it ;-) > I'd personally like to review patches as a Git repository published > on in whatever manner you prefer. If the patches are sent as .patch > files, I will be applying them on top of whatever is the latest Git > commit in Gregory's mirror of -gui and -back. Once done, they would > be submitted to Subversion. > > These approaches would be useful for easy review -- possibly even via > Gerrit. What do you think? Using git with a sane commit policy, there're plenty of options. Generating patches with format-patch, pull requests, or, as you said, directly examining the commits in the repo. That said, moving everything (repos, issue tracking, milestone management and even CI) to a self-hosted Gitlab instance (or some other similar, FOSS tool) would surely make the life of both maintainers and contributors a lot easier. I know is somehow inappropriate to say this, being a newcomer, but hey, you asked :-P > Additionally -- because reviewed code is easier to review when > executed -- could you prepare setup instructions so I can more easily > build and run this? My desktop is Ubuntu 14.04; my understanding is > that I will need to run Weston under X11 (Nvidia drivers I use are > proprietary blobs; I haven't tried setting up X-less Wayland thus > far). Weston has a variety of its own backends, so you can run in under X11, directly on FB/DRM, or under another Wayland compositor. To run it you'll just need to build wayland-protocol, wayland and weston (the forked one). Probably, there should a page in the wiki explaining this, among some description of its design and internals. > Have you filled copyright assignment forms with FSF? This would be > necessary to import your code into GNUstep itself. Not yet, but I filled them in the past for other projects (GNU Hurd, GNU Mach, and Glibc, I had a wild youth ;-), so this shouldn't be a problem. Sergio. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev