Re: One large pull request vs. several small ones?

[Christopher Jones]

Hi,

> On 13 May 2020, at 3:05 pm, Jason Liu  wrote:
> 
> Maybe it would be better to start by submitting one PR for one isolated port. 
> We can then give you feedback on anything that might need to be changed and 
> merge it. This may enable you to make similar changes in your other ports 
> before submitting them. Then submit a PR for a second port. At some point, 
> once your PRs are getting accepted with no changes, you could submit two or 
> more ports together in a single PR, if the ports are similar and not too 
> complex
> 
> Actually I already started the process more than a week ago. The first 
> library, Partio, was accepted and merged yesterday:
> 
> https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/7006 
> 
> 
> But of course, Open Shading Language (OSL), the library that depends on 
> Partio, failed the Travis CI build, since Partio didn't exist in the ports 
> tree when I submitted it at the same time:
> 
> https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/7007 
> 
> 
> This is what prompted me to write my original question, because it seems that 
> a piece of software like Blender which has a complex dependency tree could 
> potentially take weeks or months for all of the new libraries to get accepted 
> into MacPorts.

That might well be true I am afraid. The point though is simply putting all the 
changes into a single PR will not help. If anything it makes it worse as large 
PRs with a lot of changes are harder to review. Smaller bitesize pieces are 
much easier to deal with, one step at a time.

Chris



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: One large pull request vs. several small ones?

[Jason Liu]

>
> Maybe it would be better to start by submitting one PR for one isolated
> port. We can then give you feedback on anything that might need to be
> changed and merge it. This may enable you to make similar changes in your
> other ports before submitting them. Then submit a PR for a second port. At
> some point, once your PRs are getting accepted with no changes, you could
> submit two or more ports together in a single PR, if the ports are similar
> and not too complex
>

Actually I already started the process more than a week ago. The first
library, Partio, was accepted and merged yesterday:

https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/7006

But of course, Open Shading Language (OSL), the library that depends on
Partio, failed the Travis CI build, since Partio didn't exist in the ports
tree when I submitted it at the same time:

https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/7007

This is what prompted me to write my original question, because it seems
that a piece of software like Blender which has a complex dependency tree
could potentially take weeks or months for all of the new libraries to get
accepted into MacPorts.

But the general consensus seems to be to submit each library individually,
so I suppose that's the path I'll have to take.

-- 
Jason Liu


On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 8:11 PM Ryan Schmidt 
wrote:

>
>
> On May 12, 2020, at 12:44, Jason Liu wrote:
>
> > I would like to contribute a portfile for the newest version of Blender.
> I already have a local portfile that is compiling successfully, and I am
> doing some cleanup before submitting a pull request on GitHub. In addition
> to Blender itself, I have also packaged several of Blender's dependent
> libraries, which would also be new ports. My question is: Would it be
> better for me to submit all of the portfiles for Blender and the libraries
> in one single pull request? Or should I submit one pull request for each
> new package individually?
> >
> > The reason why I ask is that the dependency tree is a bit complex, with
> some of the libraries dependent on other libraries which I packaged as
> well. And if I were to submit each of the libraries individually, there's
> no telling how long it would take to get each one of them accepted and
> merged before I would be able to submit the Blender portfile.
>
>
> Thanks for contributing! And thanks for asking first.
>
> A problem I've seen before is that someone will submit a bunch of new
> ports or port updates all at once and make the same "mistakes" in each of
> them. Maybe not exactly mistakes, but doing things that are not necessarily
> the way we would recommend. It then becomes tedious to supply the same
> feedback for each port. We have many best practices that we'd like ports to
> follow and not all of them are well documented. Some of them just need to
> be learned by experience.
>
> You may also want to let the earlier ports go through the buildbot system
> first to see if there are any build problems, especially on the older OS
> versions that the continuous integration systems hooked up to our pull
> requests don't test.
>
> Maybe it would be better to start by submitting one PR for one isolated
> port. We can then give you feedback on anything that might need to be
> changed and merge it. This may enable you to make similar changes in your
> other ports before submitting them. Then submit a PR for a second port. At
> some point, once your PRs are getting accepted with no changes, you could
> submit two or more ports together in a single PR, if the ports are similar
> and not too complex.
>
> I agree with others that a "commit bomb" that adds very many new ports all
> at once or makes very many changes all at once is likely to get ignored
> because it's just too much to review all at once, and mistakes are more
> likely to get overlooked.
>
>

Re: One large pull request vs. several small ones?

[Ryan Schmidt]

On May 12, 2020, at 12:44, Jason Liu wrote:

> I would like to contribute a portfile for the newest version of Blender. I 
> already have a local portfile that is compiling successfully, and I am doing 
> some cleanup before submitting a pull request on GitHub. In addition to 
> Blender itself, I have also packaged several of Blender's dependent 
> libraries, which would also be new ports. My question is: Would it be better 
> for me to submit all of the portfiles for Blender and the libraries in one 
> single pull request? Or should I submit one pull request for each new package 
> individually?
> 
> The reason why I ask is that the dependency tree is a bit complex, with some 
> of the libraries dependent on other libraries which I packaged as well. And 
> if I were to submit each of the libraries individually, there's no telling 
> how long it would take to get each one of them accepted and merged before I 
> would be able to submit the Blender portfile.


Thanks for contributing! And thanks for asking first.

A problem I've seen before is that someone will submit a bunch of new ports or 
port updates all at once and make the same "mistakes" in each of them. Maybe 
not exactly mistakes, but doing things that are not necessarily the way we 
would recommend. It then becomes tedious to supply the same feedback for each 
port. We have many best practices that we'd like ports to follow and not all of 
them are well documented. Some of them just need to be learned by experience.

You may also want to let the earlier ports go through the buildbot system first 
to see if there are any build problems, especially on the older OS versions 
that the continuous integration systems hooked up to our pull requests don't 
test.

Maybe it would be better to start by submitting one PR for one isolated port. 
We can then give you feedback on anything that might need to be changed and 
merge it. This may enable you to make similar changes in your other ports 
before submitting them. Then submit a PR for a second port. At some point, once 
your PRs are getting accepted with no changes, you could submit two or more 
ports together in a single PR, if the ports are similar and not too complex.

I agree with others that a "commit bomb" that adds very many new ports all at 
once or makes very many changes all at once is likely to get ignored because 
it's just too much to review all at once, and mistakes are more likely to get 
overlooked.

Re: One large pull request vs. several small ones?

[Jason Liu]

>
> Mixing up new ports, with port updates, in one PR would really be a bit of
> a mess, I would say.
>

Everything is a new port, there are no updates (all library dependencies
that have already been packaged work fine as-is)... but your overall point
is well taken.

-- 
Jason


On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 2:06 PM Christopher Jones 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I would definitely say the many small PR approach is preferred to a single
> massive one with many many changes. A big PR like that is not going to help
> get it reviewed quicker. Mixing up new ports, with port updates, in one PR
> would really be a bit of a mess, I would say.
>
> So yes, please try and submit each update separately. Once you have all
> the bits in place you ca then submit Blender update itself.
>
> Chris
>
> On 12 May 2020, at 6:59 pm, Ruben Di Battista 
> wrote:
>
> I think the best approach is to isolate “atomic” changes, and open a PR
> for each of them. This way problems with dependencies can be isolated and
> decoupled from those for Blender.
>
> If they are really too many, maybe try to provide PRs for semantically
> related libraries or somehow related in some other way (like, “python”
> dependencies). I would say a maximum of 3 - 4 ports per PR?
>
> I’ll leave the word to more expert members of the community, that’s my
> general approach when I need to merge upstream complex trees of ports...
>
>   _
> -. .´  |
>   ',  ;|∞∞
> ˜˜ |∞ RdB
> ,.,|∞∞
>   .'   '.  |
> -'   `’
> https://rdb.is
>
>
> On 12 May 2020 at 19:45:30, Jason Liu (jason...@umich.edu) wrote:
>
> I would like to contribute a portfile for the newest version of Blender. I
> already have a local portfile that is compiling successfully, and I am
> doing some cleanup before submitting a pull request on GitHub. In addition
> to Blender itself, I have also packaged several of Blender's dependent
> libraries, which would also be new ports. My question is: Would it be
> better for me to submit all of the portfiles for Blender and the libraries
> in one single pull request? Or should I submit one pull request for each
> new package individually?
>
> The reason why I ask is that the dependency tree is a bit complex, with
> some of the libraries dependent on other libraries which I packaged as
> well. And if I were to submit each of the libraries individually, there's
> no telling how long it would take to get each one of them accepted and
> merged before I would be able to submit the Blender portfile.
>
> --
> Jason Liu
>
>
>

Re: One large pull request vs. several small ones?

[Christopher Jones]

Hi,

I would definitely say the many small PR approach is preferred to a single 
massive one with many many changes. A big PR like that is not going to help get 
it reviewed quicker. Mixing up new ports, with port updates, in one PR would 
really be a bit of a mess, I would say.

So yes, please try and submit each update separately. Once you have all the 
bits in place you ca then submit Blender update itself.

Chris

> On 12 May 2020, at 6:59 pm, Ruben Di Battista  
> wrote:
> 
> I think the best approach is to isolate “atomic” changes, and open a PR for 
> each of them. This way problems with dependencies can be isolated and 
> decoupled from those for Blender. 
> 
> If they are really too many, maybe try to provide PRs for semantically 
> related libraries or somehow related in some other way (like, “python” 
> dependencies). I would say a maximum of 3 - 4 ports per PR? 
> 
> I’ll leave the word to more expert members of the community, that’s my 
> general approach when I need to merge upstream complex trees of ports...
> 
>   _   
> -. .´  |
>   ',  ;|∞∞
> ˜˜ |∞ RdB
> ,.,|∞∞
>   .'   '.  |
> -'   `’
> 
> https://rdb.is 
> 
> On 12 May 2020 at 19:45:30, Jason Liu (jason...@umich.edu 
> ) wrote:
> 
>> I would like to contribute a portfile for the newest version of Blender. I 
>> already have a local portfile that is compiling successfully, and I am doing 
>> some cleanup before submitting a pull request on GitHub. In addition to 
>> Blender itself, I have also packaged several of Blender's dependent 
>> libraries, which would also be new ports. My question is: Would it be better 
>> for me to submit all of the portfiles for Blender and the libraries in one 
>> single pull request? Or should I submit one pull request for each new 
>> package individually?
>> 
>> The reason why I ask is that the dependency tree is a bit complex, with some 
>> of the libraries dependent on other libraries which I packaged as well. And 
>> if I were to submit each of the libraries individually, there's no telling 
>> how long it would take to get each one of them accepted and merged before I 
>> would be able to submit the Blender portfile.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jason Liu



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: One large pull request vs. several small ones?

[Ruben Di Battista]

I think the best approach is to isolate “atomic” changes, and open a PR for 
each of them. This way problems with dependencies can be isolated and decoupled 
from those for Blender. 

If they are really too many, maybe try to provide PRs for semantically related 
libraries or somehow related in some other way (like, “python” dependencies). I 
would say a maximum of 3 - 4 ports per PR? 

I’ll leave the word to more expert members of the community, that’s my general 
approach when I need to merge upstream complex trees of ports...

  _   
-. .´  |
  ',  ;|∞∞
˜˜ |∞ RdB
,.,|∞∞
  .'   '.  |
-'   `’

https://rdb.is

On 12 May 2020 at 19:45:30, Jason Liu (jason...@umich.edu) wrote:

I would like to contribute a portfile for the newest version of Blender. I 
already have a local portfile that is compiling successfully, and I am doing 
some cleanup before submitting a pull request on GitHub. In addition to Blender 
itself, I have also packaged several of Blender's dependent libraries, which 
would also be new ports. My question is: Would it be better for me to submit 
all of the portfiles for Blender and the libraries in one single pull request? 
Or should I submit one pull request for each new package individually?

The reason why I ask is that the dependency tree is a bit complex, with some of 
the libraries dependent on other libraries which I packaged as well. And if I 
were to submit each of the libraries individually, there's no telling how long 
it would take to get each one of them accepted and merged before I would be 
able to submit the Blender portfile.

-- 
Jason Liu

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using AMPGpg