Re: [Orgmode] Development setup (was: Org-mode release 7.01)
Suggestions: 1.) Could the original mail (the one including the actual patch, even if modified) be attached to the autogenerated email, please? This should be at the very bottom of the mail, because of length and priority. 2.) And how about the subject? The OP's subject is what I read on the patchwork server. Why can't that be (part of) the subject of the "Accepted" message? E.g.: [Orgmode] [ACCEPTED] org-capture with LISP function template Maybe something that works on gmane et al, too. 3.) If there are annotations to the patch, would it be possible to include that comment in that automated message? I don't now how the patch is switched to accepted on the patchwork server. But a simple textarea field and appropriate POST variable would do, wouldn't it? 4) If traffic warrants it and as more users join this list generating more posts... perhaps a new list called emacs-orgmode-dev for development related work? ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Development setup (was: Org-mode release 7.01)
Hi Sebastian, I would like to fix this as well but have not yet had the time to do so and I am being hampered by my limited knowledge of python and of the patchwork server. This will change, but I don't know how fast. - Carsten On Jul 20, 2010, at 2:01 AM, Sebastian Rose wrote: Hi Carsten and John, Also, I need to shout out my gratitude to the increasing number of volunteers in the project. John Wiegley's patchwork server has done wonders for streamlining the process of reviewing and applying patches. I have applied dozens of patches though this process, just in the last week. The issue tracker by David Maus has finally brought some structure into the stream of ideas and reports on this mailing list, at a moment when I was about to falter under the amount of work maintaining this project means for me. Frankly, right now I don't know how I would do things without David's competent and efficient help - he has effectively and silently become co-maintainer of this project. The new technique drives me crazy. To me, it feels frustrating compared to the direct means of "the good old times". Now, that the release is done, it's time to speak about the next decade of Org mode developing ;) A minute ago I got 5 mails like this one here: Subject: "Patchwork: Patch 150 Accepted" Body: Patch 145 (http://patchwork.newartisans.com/patch/145/) is now Accepted. This relates to the following submission: http://mid.gmane.org/%3C1279347713-29950-1-git-send-email-dmaus%40ictsoc.de%3E This current mechanism might help the maintainers as it's automated, but for me it's hard to follow. I often delete mails suggesting patches I don't apprehend. I then get those dangling "Patchwork: ..." messages. I simply don't want to gather all those mails from this high traffic list, just to now to which issue the accepted patches belong. I don't want to click the link(s) in those mails and wait for my browser to load either. Suggestions: 1.) Could the original mail (the one including the actual patch, even if modified) be attached to the autogenerated email, please? This should be at the very bottom of the mail, because of length and priority. 2.) And how about the subject? The OP's subject is what I read on the patchwork server. Why can't that be (part of) the subject of the "Accepted" message? E.g.: [Orgmode] [ACCEPTED] org-capture with LISP function template Maybe something that works on gmane et al, too. 3.) If there are annotations to the patch, would it be possible to include that comment in that automated message? I don't now how the patch is switched to accepted on the patchwork server. But a simple textarea field and appropriate POST variable would do, wouldn't it? This is all information available on the patchwork server. So I hope it's just changing a few lines of code? I sometimes receive mails from bugzilla servers, concerning bug reports I wrote years ago. I never had that problem to understand what those mails were trying to tell me. Thanks for considering this. Best wishes Sebastian ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode - Carsten ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Development setup (was: Org-mode release 7.01)
On Jul 20, 2010, at 4:32 AM, Erik Iverson wrote: Suggestions: 1.) Could the original mail (the one including the actual patch, even if modified) be attached to the autogenerated email, please? This should be at the very bottom of the mail, because of length and priority. 2.) And how about the subject? The OP's subject is what I read on the patchwork server. Why can't that be (part of) the subject of the "Accepted" message? E.g.: [Orgmode] [ACCEPTED] org-capture with LISP function template Maybe something that works on gmane et al, too. 3.) If there are annotations to the patch, would it be possible to include that comment in that automated message? I don't now how the patch is switched to accepted on the patchwork server. But a simple textarea field and appropriate POST variable would do, wouldn't it? 4) If traffic warrants it and as more users join this list generating more posts... perhaps a new list called emacs-orgmode-dev for development related work? This proposal has come up in the past, but so far the conclusion always has been that we still prefer to keep things together. I guess with modern email readers with filtering, high volumne mailing lists do not present a big issue. May people already prefix email subject with [PATCH] or "Bug:", which helps in filtering. - Carsten ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Development setup (was: Org-mode release 7.01)
Carsten Dominik writes: > Hi Sebastian, > > I would like to fix this as well but have not yet had the time to > do so and I am being hampered by my limited knowledge of python > and of the patchwork server. > > This will change, but I don't know how fast. > > - Carsten Ok. Good to hear! Tanks Sebastian > On Jul 20, 2010, at 2:01 AM, Sebastian Rose wrote: > >> Hi Carsten and John, >> >> >>> Also, I need to shout out my gratitude to the increasing number of >>> volunteers in the project. >>> >>> John Wiegley's patchwork server has done wonders for streamlining the >>> process of reviewing and applying patches. I have applied dozens of >>> patches though this process, just in the last week. >>> >>> The issue tracker by David Maus has finally brought some structure >>> into the stream of ideas and reports on this mailing list, at a >>> moment when I was about to falter under the amount of work >>> maintaining this project means for me. Frankly, right now I >>> don't know how I would do things without David's competent and >>> efficient help - he has effectively and silently become >>> co-maintainer of this project. >> >> >> The new technique drives me crazy. To me, it feels frustrating compared >> to the direct means of "the good old times". >> >> >> Now, that the release is done, it's time to speak about the next decade >> of Org mode developing ;) >> >> >> >> A minute ago I got 5 mails like this one here: >> >> >> Subject: >> >> "Patchwork: Patch 150 Accepted" >> >> Body: >> >>Patch 145 (http://patchwork.newartisans.com/patch/145/) is now Accepted. >> >>This relates to the following submission: >> >> >> http://mid.gmane.org/%3C1279347713-29950-1-git-send-email-dmaus%40ictsoc.de%3E >> >> >> >> >> This current mechanism might help the maintainers as it's automated, but >> for me it's hard to follow. >> >> I often delete mails suggesting patches I don't apprehend. I then get >> those dangling "Patchwork: ..." messages. I simply don't want to gather >> all those mails from this high traffic list, just to now to which >> issue the accepted patches belong. >> >> I don't want to click the link(s) in those mails and wait for my browser >> to load either. >> >> >> Suggestions: >> >> 1.) Could the original mail (the one including the actual patch, even if >>modified) be attached to the autogenerated email, please? >>This should be at the very bottom of the mail, because of length and >>priority. >> >> 2.) And how about the subject? The OP's subject is what I read on the >>patchwork server. Why can't that be (part of) the subject of the >>"Accepted" message? E.g.: >> >>[Orgmode] [ACCEPTED] org-capture with LISP function template >> >>Maybe something that works on gmane et al, too. >> >> 3.) If there are annotations to the patch, would it be possible to >>include that comment in that automated message? I don't now how the >>patch is switched to accepted on the patchwork server. But a simple >>textarea field and appropriate POST variable would do, wouldn't it? >> >> >> >> This is all information available on the patchwork server. So I hope >> it's just changing a few lines of code? >> >> I sometimes receive mails from bugzilla servers, concerning bug reports >> I wrote years ago. I never had that problem to understand what those >> mails were trying to tell me. >> >> >> Thanks for considering this. >> >> >> Best wishes >> >> Sebastian >> >> ___ >> Emacs-orgmode mailing list >> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. >> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode > > - Carsten ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
