Re: mc is over!?
If you're looking for new developers, hostility towards people volunteering to help is probably not a good approach. Looks like the project is hosted here (in case any other newbies are reading): https://www.midnight-commander.org/ Turns out I already have an account, probably from filing bug reports over the years. There's some good info there. I checked out a copy of the code today and got a clean compile. I'm going to be upgrading my box from Fedora 21 to 22 next week, so it may be a few more days before I get chance to do any coding. Is the list of active developers on the above site up to date or is that the list old developers who announced they were leaving? -Steve On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 02:16 +0200, Egmont Koblinger wrote: You ask for source code repo and stuff? Do apologize to me,it's alot of shots andd beers speaking of me right now, but if you ask these questions and couldn't figure out the answers for yourself (I mean: the answer is straight there on the opening homepage of mc) then i'm afraid you might not be the kind of person the project's looking for. Sry Sent from mobile On May 28, 2015 11:57 PM, Steve Rainwater srainwa...@ncc.com wrote: Hi all, I'm another long time user of mc. I've used it on Windows, Solaris, HP-UX, and currently on GNU/Linux (mostly Fedora and CentOS). I use it daily and find it an indispensable tool. Thanks to everyone who's worked on it over the years! If mc development is really coming to an end without new developers, I'm willing to devote a little time to working on it. I'm a C programmer and have submitted patches here and there to other projects like Apache and LibXML2. I don't really care much about new mc features but I would like to see work done on fixing bugs. There are mc bugs that have annoyed me for many years, like the keybinding breakage with with GNOME terminal that happened four or five years back and still isn't fixed. Can someone point me to the developer resources like the source code repo? I guess a good starting point is check out the current code and get it compiling. Do new developers need to create an account anywhere to get access? -Steve On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 20:03 +0100, Michal Pirgl wrote: Hi I have been using mc for many years and I would like to thank to everyone who spent their time on this project. I also cannot promise 20hrs in a week but I would like to participate/develop as much as I can to help in free time. Regards, Michal From: Mike Smithson mdooligan gmail com To: mc-devel gnome org Cc: mc gnome org Subject: Re: mc is over!? Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 07:26:22 -0700 Bah. Mc is not over. Things change, that's all. I've been into mc since I don't know when. The first time I used it. Mid/late 90s I'm guessing. I saw how it floundered in the 4.6 series. I shrugged and kept tweaking and hacking my version. A few years went by and I looked it up again, purely out of curiosity. I was delighted that someone had given it a full work over into the 4.8 series. There were some persistent, puzzling, and very annoying bugs that are now gone. Excellent work, gentlemen. Thank you very much. My list of personal patches went from ~30 down to ~5, where they sit now, mostly minor interface tweaks. Mc works, and it works very well. If development stagnates for a while, so be it. There is actually very little to do. Mc is as close to perfect as software gets. There will always be bugs and minor tweaks, and that's what needs to be worked on, now and forever. Yes, mc in its current incarnation is a model from the 1990s. I like it that way. I'm not a big fan of C++. I also don't like eye candy in a tool that is all about functionality and utility, and I very much appreciate a file manager that can operate when XWindows cannot, or the system is barely bootable. It's the perfect size: big enough to be feature-rich and highly usable, yet small enough that a single individual can (theoretically) get his head around the entire code base. It's also fun to hack. I cannot guarantee 20hrs/week, but I
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
Hello, On Thu, 28 May 2015 12:11:04 +0200 Egmont Koblinger egm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi guys, [] Instead, I believe it should be a core with 3-5 people who have similar working style and similar vision of the project, and each contribute just a few hours per week. Yes. And generally, it would be nice if these people would be driven not by personal ambitions of something to do regarding mc, but by desire to serve community. And their core responsibilities would be to process submissions, and guide contributors into producing patches suitable for merging. [] I'd be happy to see Mooffie on the team right away, his work (along with his style and the contents of the homepage) totally convinced me. There's concern (which Mooffie himself raises) of de-anonymization. Indeed, for a tool which can be run as root, it would be nice to know who's really that guy who maintains it. I'm sorry to say this, but I myself cannot guarantee anything and cannot make any commitments. I'm spending a long vacation right now where I was planning to do some coding on my primary hobby project (gnome-terminal), and maybe address one or two issues on my secondary hobby project (mc); all subject to my mood. After this vacation I'll start a new job which will require 100% of me. So I'd rather stay an occasional contributor as I am now, and not devote myself to anything with mc. Thanks for finding time to respond during your vacation. But there's a bit of contradiction: you said that you would have Moofie on the team, but then say you can't make *any* commitments (we're already on the same line that there can't be any extraordinary commitments like 20hrs/week or something). So, let me just ask: what do you think should be done now (refarding this whole maintainership situation), and in what timeframe? It would be very nice if there was fresh start right from the start, otherwise it's just the same situation as before: the procrastination, and most people don't know what and how it will be. G-t is my personal hobby project in the sense that I do hunt down and address bugs that cause problems to other people but I myself don't particularly care about. Mc never reached this level for me, I never took time to look at bugs and patches that I myself wasn't personally interested in. Don't ask me why it turned out this way, I don't know - maybe it was because on g-t I got quick feedback of my work, whereas on mc I often had to wait for so long that I almost lost interest, and often missed the free time I had when I could have worked on these issues. Yes, feedback people get on first submission and overall impression is very important. That's why I think that timely responses and formal criteria for processing patches (instead of I don't like) are very important. And that's IMHO what maintainers should work on, anything else can be done by community as guides by maintainers. As for the current segfault issue, I think the broken change should be reverted for now and a .15 released until we come up with a proper solution. I won't say this is obvious, I just say +1. Giant thanks to you guys who maintained this project for years, I'm sad to see you go, and wish you all the best! That's certainly true, and there're a lot to learn from them (while some things to change too). Again, would be nice to have timely and smooth transition, while they still in loop and oversee/help with various issues. e. -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmis...@gmail.com ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
Hello, On Sat, 30 May 2015 13:56:54 +0200 Oswald Buddenhagen oswald.buddenha...@gmx.de wrote: On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 02:08:37PM +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: On Sat, 30 May 2015 11:53:58 +0200 Oswald Buddenhagen oswald.buddenha...@gmx.de wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:46:08AM +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: You again trying to over-complicate. Start from a clean page on github, while invite community to migrate issues from trac to github. Most content on trac from people who gave up on mc long ago. It makes sense to process what active people are interested in and leave old stuff where it is. nonsense. the old infrastructure is going to disappear at some point, and everything on it will be lost. it is entirely irrelevant that many of the people lost interest - most of the issues are still valid, and a lot of time went into discussing solutions. it would be plain stupid to throw this away, never mind the disregard for other people's work. I didn't propose to throw it away. I proposed to leave it where it is for now and work on github issues/patches (which are also issues/patches, surprise), while ask help from wider community to migrate issues to github. If/when new maintainers ran out of github issues, they certainly will look into trac themselves, either at individual issues, or en-masse migration. The talk is about smooth start for new maintainers without extraordinary efforts. i think you are being a tad overly optimistic here. And you, as few other folks, try to frighten away people with how hard it is. What's the point, what's the plan with such behavior? Hope that someone else will come and tell, yeah, I have 20hrs/week, and I already brought bucket and a mop to start cleaning your Augean stables? Previous cases show that it takes 1+ year for such event to happen, which is not smooth transition at all. just for some perspective: a year ago or so i went through the effort of un-botching the previous import. more than half a decade after the fact. at this rate, there is no reason whatsoever to think that the infra will still be even there when somebody finally feels like doing a migration (midnight-commander.org is owned privately by slavaz). I know, hope Slava/Yury/whoever can maintain it, say, till the end of this year. Again, not doing anything at all and waiting for a knight to save it won't help either. also, the longer you wait, the more work gets duplicated, and the harder it will be to merge the data sets in a useful way. Let's get to a productive tone: your help with the migration will be much welcome and appreciated. that's why i would expect some serious commitment to a migration from somebody who wants to take over with the blessing of the previous maintainers. Sorry, but you cannot expect anything like that. Everything will be done on best effort basis, just the same as was done before, and as always the case with OpenSource projects. Acceptance is the first step. If that is achieved, we can discuss technical and organizational/personal commitments aspects. [] So, you started an argument in githib ticket, then came here just to criticize and repeat 'tis not possible? there is no contradiction whatsoever in that. i can review and discuss despite full awareness that i won't be able to put a final stamp of approval under it. No problem, but there should be finite time put into that, we can't go in circles forever or even too long. Come on, time for productive actions - are *you* ready to be a maintainer? no. exactly because i lack the time (or personal motivation) to make the commitment. it's not like i haven't been tempted during a decade of lurking. Indeed, we talk here not about the best solution, but of not allowing the worst, when project went unmaintained for a prolonged time, and at the same time improving some aspects wrt previous practices. -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmis...@gmail.com ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
Hello, On Sat, 30 May 2015 11:53:58 +0200 Oswald Buddenhagen oswald.buddenha...@gmx.de wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:46:08AM +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: On Wed, 27 May 2015 22:28:15 +0200 Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com wrote: For example, one could have set up a script to import Trac tickets into Github Issues. There are many half-way working scripts floating around, but they need testing and fixing. Last time, Savannah import into Trac took quite some effort, but it turned out to be very worthwhile. You again trying to over-complicate. Start from a clean page on github, while invite community to migrate issues from trac to github. Most content on trac from people who gave up on mc long ago. It makes sense to process what active people are interested in and leave old stuff where it is. nonsense. the old infrastructure is going to disappear at some point, and everything on it will be lost. it is entirely irrelevant that many of the people lost interest - most of the issues are still valid, and a lot of time went into discussing solutions. it would be plain stupid to throw this away, never mind the disregard for other people's work. I didn't propose to throw it away. I proposed to leave it where it is for now and work on github issues/patches (which are also issues/patches, surprise), while ask help from wider community to migrate issues to github. If/when new maintainers ran out of github issues, they certainly will look into trac themselves, either at individual issues, or en-masse migration. The talk is about smooth start for new maintainers without extraordinary efforts. I have couple of my patches accepted into mc (trivial, yes, it's on a non-trivial thing I stuck due to lack of discussion), so pass one criteria I myself proposed. My maintainership program would be: 1. Tear off all the unmaintainable code. see, statements like that make me hope very much that you never get direct write access to the repository. Certainly I'm keen to provide full disclosure of my programme, so people aren't surprised later. As for being a maintainer, I'm certainly hope that there will be more suitable people to take that role. But I was asked would I take maintainership myself, and I provided the answer. 3. Require patches with good descriptions (including references), try to respond to pull requests quickly with suggestion, close those which weren't got into shape in 1 month as unmaintainable. that's a nice plan, but requires a quite substantial committment to put into action. which brings us back to yury's conclusions. So, you started an argument in githib ticket, then came here just to criticize and repeat 'tis not possible? Come on, time for productive actions - are *you* ready to be a maintainer? What's *your* maintainership plan? -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmis...@gmail.com ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:46:08AM +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: On Wed, 27 May 2015 22:28:15 +0200 Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com wrote: For example, one could have set up a script to import Trac tickets into Github Issues. There are many half-way working scripts floating around, but they need testing and fixing. Last time, Savannah import into Trac took quite some effort, but it turned out to be very worthwhile. You again trying to over-complicate. Start from a clean page on github, while invite community to migrate issues from trac to github. Most content on trac from people who gave up on mc long ago. It makes sense to process what active people are interested in and leave old stuff where it is. nonsense. the old infrastructure is going to disappear at some point, and everything on it will be lost. it is entirely irrelevant that many of the people lost interest - most of the issues are still valid, and a lot of time went into discussing solutions. it would be plain stupid to throw this away, never mind the disregard for other people's work. I have couple of my patches accepted into mc (trivial, yes, it's on a non-trivial thing I stuck due to lack of discussion), so pass one criteria I myself proposed. My maintainership program would be: 1. Tear off all the unmaintainable code. see, statements like that make me hope very much that you never get direct write access to the repository. 3. Require patches with good descriptions (including references), try to respond to pull requests quickly with suggestion, close those which weren't got into shape in 1 month as unmaintainable. that's a nice plan, but requires a quite substantial committment to put into action. which brings us back to yury's conclusions. ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 02:08:37PM +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: On Sat, 30 May 2015 11:53:58 +0200 Oswald Buddenhagen oswald.buddenha...@gmx.de wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:46:08AM +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: You again trying to over-complicate. Start from a clean page on github, while invite community to migrate issues from trac to github. Most content on trac from people who gave up on mc long ago. It makes sense to process what active people are interested in and leave old stuff where it is. nonsense. the old infrastructure is going to disappear at some point, and everything on it will be lost. it is entirely irrelevant that many of the people lost interest - most of the issues are still valid, and a lot of time went into discussing solutions. it would be plain stupid to throw this away, never mind the disregard for other people's work. I didn't propose to throw it away. I proposed to leave it where it is for now and work on github issues/patches (which are also issues/patches, surprise), while ask help from wider community to migrate issues to github. If/when new maintainers ran out of github issues, they certainly will look into trac themselves, either at individual issues, or en-masse migration. The talk is about smooth start for new maintainers without extraordinary efforts. i think you are being a tad overly optimistic here. just for some perspective: a year ago or so i went through the effort of un-botching the previous import. more than half a decade after the fact. at this rate, there is no reason whatsoever to think that the infra will still be even there when somebody finally feels like doing a migration (midnight-commander.org is owned privately by slavaz). also, the longer you wait, the more work gets duplicated, and the harder it will be to merge the data sets in a useful way. that's why i would expect some serious commitment to a migration from somebody who wants to take over with the blessing of the previous maintainers. 3. Require patches with good descriptions (including references), try to respond to pull requests quickly with suggestion, close those which weren't got into shape in 1 month as unmaintainable. that's a nice plan, but requires a quite substantial committment to put into action. which brings us back to yury's conclusions. So, you started an argument in githib ticket, then came here just to criticize and repeat 'tis not possible? there is no contradiction whatsoever in that. i can review and discuss despite full awareness that i won't be able to put a final stamp of approval under it. Come on, time for productive actions - are *you* ready to be a maintainer? no. exactly because i lack the time (or personal motivation) to make the commitment. it's not like i haven't been tempted during a decade of lurking. ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 14:08 +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: But I was asked would I take maintainership myself, and I provided the answer. Sorry, I missed the answer in your numerous emails. My understanding was that there was no answer, that is you don't want to make any clear commitments yourself, but rather prefer to consult other people as to how they should proceed, is that right? If not, it would be helpful to know how much time and how regularly you are ready to commit, and what exactly you are going to be working on. If yes, then I'll rather not answer the rest of the mails, because it's going to cost me many hours. I'll try to post my own plan separately as time permits. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 13:56 +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: (midnight-commander.org is owned privately by slavaz). Just to set the record straight: 1) The domain itself is now paid managed by me through a collective account, to which Slava and the rest of the team have access to. 2) In what concerns the server, after the last crash, I have arranged a virtual machine at OSUOSL, where all the stuff that used to run on the old box has been moved. I've also moved the downloads to OSUOSL mirroring infrastructure sometime later. 3) The builders are owned privately by me, but I will have to decommission them at some point soon and will set up Travis instead. 4) The rest is various hosted services to which multiple people, usually me and Slava have access to. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
Yury, That's the reason to decommission existing infrastructure asap - you pay for the things that work against your productivity. I see that you not so interested in migration as you didn't answer my question in private. So I'm asking it here: 1) What db backend do you use in trac? 2) I'm ready to help you with migration to git. Do YOU ready for that? On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com wrote: On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 13:56 +0200, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: (midnight-commander.org is owned privately by slavaz). Just to set the record straight: 1) The domain itself is now paid managed by me through a collective account, to which Slava and the rest of the team have access to. 2) In what concerns the server, after the last crash, I have arranged a virtual machine at OSUOSL, where all the stuff that used to run on the old box has been moved. I've also moved the downloads to OSUOSL mirroring infrastructure sometime later. 3) The builders are owned privately by me, but I will have to decommission them at some point soon and will set up Travis instead. 4) The rest is various hosted services to which multiple people, usually me and Slava have access to. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel -- Thanks, Volodymyr ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Paul Sokolovsky's maintainership application, was: Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
Hello, On Sat, 30 May 2015 13:57:32 +0200 Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com wrote: On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 14:08 +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: But I was asked would I take maintainership myself, and I provided the answer. Sorry, I missed the answer in your numerous emails. Please see numbered list at the bottom of https://mail.gnome.org/archives/mc-devel/2015-May/msg00069.html , tehn number list at https://mail.gnome.org/archives/mc-devel/2015-May/msg00073.html . My understanding was that there was no answer, that is you don't want to make any clear commitments yourself, but rather prefer to consult other people as to how they should proceed, is that right? No, not right. If not, it would be helpful to know how much time and how regularly you are ready to commit, and what exactly you are going to be working on. As a maintainer, I would consider the most important job is to provide timely response to submissions, and lead submitters into preparing patches in a way suitable for merging. I don't have immediate plans to commit something myself (except for my own patches, once they're reviewed). But if I see that there're many issues reported for some non-core subsystem, or repeated attempts to fix it fail, I way raise the question of removal of that subsystem, and if initial discussion warrants, will prepare patches for that. All my idea of maintainership is based on the fact that I already use github daily, and already maintain many projects. github specifically improved my productivity a lot, while on previous-generation hosting sites I less than a dozen of projects, on github I have 100+ (I don't work on all of them at the same time, usually in round-robin fashion on 3-5 at the same time, plus regularly submit bugs/discuss issues with other projects). On top of that, I don't have free time last 3 years, having even less time last 1.5 years, and with all that I participate/maintain dozens of projects, and come up with new regularly. So, having one more project to look after doesn't add or take much from my situation (with maintenance efforts as described above). Feel free to look at my activity stats on github for perspective: https://github.com/pfalcon I can't give any firm numbers on how much I could spend on mc specifically. But if you want to hear something still, let it me 15min a day, than an extra hour on weekend, 2 hrs per week. If yes, then I'll rather not answer the rest of the mails, because it's going to cost me many hours. Yes, I also consider this proposal to be final, and ready to wait agreed-upon time (max 1 month, my suggestion is 2 weeks) to see if it's useful. I will be only glad if better (like, truly better, which care about community, not some code features) candidates will be found. I will be unhappy if better candidates won't be found and my proposal won't be found useful, but then I tried to be useful for a project which is important to me, and otherwise I don't have lack of projects to maintain. I'll try to post my own plan separately as time permits. Thanks, looking forward to it. Per above, I'd appreciate if there was timeframe set for applicants, so that they knew that if that time passed, and they were not selected, they are free to make other commitments elsewhere. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmis...@gmail.com ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 15:22 +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: Everything will be done on best effort basis, just the same as was done before, and as always the case with OpenSource projects. That's nonsense; most successful open source projects have drivers who are either employed to invest time into it, or have other circumstances that allow them to invest 10 hours per week as a bare minimum and above. This is where the community shines: if you have several drivers who are able to process contributions in a timely manner, it adds a lot of value, innovation, diversity, etc. Acceptance is the first step. If that is achieved, we can discuss technical and organizational/personal commitments aspects. I don't buy this; the first step is getting some real work done. Then we can discuss the acceptance. Example: Moofie is convincing, because he's done some excellent work and then went public with it. He didn't start by showing up and saying: hey, this is my plan, you have to accept it first, and then we can see if I'm actually going to do anything. He's already proven everything to me. You are not convincing at all, because all you have done so far is to waste a lot of time with your delusional posts (also in the thread started by Moofie!), and it seems that I'm not the only one who isn't very much impressed. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
Hello, On Sat, 30 May 2015 14:59:04 +0200 Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com wrote: On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 15:22 +0300, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: Everything will be done on best effort basis, just the same as was done before, and as always the case with OpenSource projects. That's nonsense; most successful open source projects have drivers who are either employed to invest time into it, or have other circumstances that allow them to invest 10 hours per week as a bare minimum and above. We're talking majority open-source projects here, and mc is for a very long time is far from being successful (but indeed, for a project like mc it's enough to be just existing and maintained). This is where the community shines: if you have several drivers who are able to process contributions in a timely manner, it adds a lot of value, innovation, diversity, etc. Acceptance is the first step. If that is achieved, we can discuss technical and organizational/personal commitments aspects. I don't buy this; the first step is getting some real work done. Then we can discuss the acceptance. Example: Moofie is convincing, because he's done some excellent work and then went public with it. You think that adding more bloat is excellent, I think that it's bad, actually, the only way I can agree to adding more features is *replacing* older bloat, not adding more. He didn't start by showing up and saying: hey, this is my plan, you have to accept it first, and then we can see if I'm actually going to do anything. I'm doing stuff - see my github account. I can do (more) for mc too, given opportunity. But whatever I do, I do step by step, and so far my patch is stuck in the queue without proper review, so I'm not going forward until this problem is solved - replying to people, reviewing their stuff, working with them to make it better to lead into mainline. And that's exactly what I'm ready to start with. And if that's too little - well guys, it's exactly the area where you had problems and clearly need help/improvement. He's already proven everything to me. Good, take him to your team. Please pay attention to everyone's issues anyway. You are not convincing at all, because all you have done so far is to waste a lot of time with your delusional posts (also in the thread started by Moofie!), and it seems that I'm not the only one who isn't very much impressed. Ok, I consider my application rejected, and I'm generally not surprised (I indeed objectively didn't do too much for mc - but again, that's the problem which I'd like to be resolved - for everyone, not just for me - mc should be welcoming of contributions, and help people to help it). -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmis...@gmail.com ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Yury V. Zaytsev y...@shurup.com wrote: On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 08:23 -0400, Volodymyr Buell wrote: That's the reason to decommission existing infrastructure asap - you pay for the things that work against your productivity. I've heard this before, and you still haven't explained how it works against *my* productivity, or the productivity of Andrew. I was referring to productivity of the team as a whole. And if you want to hear an explanation, here is this: * the process of code reviewing is non transparent enough for the community - attaching the patches to the tickets and reviewing these patches is not the same as pull requests * people tend to use the tools if they are good. If there are few options - hack the project on github and hack another project on trac - I'd say majority will choose the github I personally couldn't do much else in 1 hour per week that I'm spending on it anyways. Andrew likes it and it does make him productive: check the git log if you need statistics. Do you think that if the tracker is migrated to Github, I will magically be able to review 500 tickets in this 1 hour per week or what? You did get me wrong. I'm not saying about your personal productivity. Sorry for miscommunication. There are lot of people saying that dvc is bad because they used to share their work by sending *.patch files and they don't need anything else. Does that mean that it works well for other team members? I'd say no. What I meant is that it's much easier to work with PRs instead of patch files. It's easier for community to help to review these requests. It's easy to newcomers to get to it... A valid reason for moving in my opinion would be to reduce reliance on privately owned stuff, and I have been slowly working in this direction, and hope to take it further in the future, but other than that, I see no other reasons currently to do so. On Sat, 2015-05-30 at 08:23 -0400, Volodymyr Buell wrote: I see that you not so interested in migration as you didn't answer my question in private. It's not just a matter of interest; realistically, I can scrap up to 5 hours per week for mc, which means process the mailing list ~2 times per week; processing huge emails full of very questionable content by some posters takes hours, so there we are. I saw your mails among others, and I'll try to reply tomorrow. Now in what concerns the interest, yes, it is low. For once I wholeheartedly agree with Oswald. There need to be some very important advantage in the migration, and if we go for it, it should be done properly. One advantage could be that person X steps up and shows enough commitment to prepare a migration like Slava did, and which was later completed by Oswald. He also declares it as a pre-requisite for him taking over and investing serious time in the project. Under these circumstances, I can stick my own (very negative) opinion of Github issue tracker somewhere deep down, and accept that the tools are chosen by those people who do the real work. If they like Github issues and they make them productive, so be it. But I don't buy unsubstantiated arguments about magical community of productive and qualified members appearing out of nowhere, and doing quality code review over large spans of time. Instead, what will happen is that Github issue tracker will become just as dead swamp of issues and patches, as Trac has become now. I've been part of too many projects, and I know how successful open source projects work: there is a lot happening behind the scenes. -- Sincerely yours, Yury V. Zaytsev -- Thanks, Volodymyr ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
Re: mc is over!? - post by Ilia Maslakov on Russian-speaking IT site
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 02:47:02PM +0200, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote: Under these circumstances, I can stick my own (very negative) opinion of Github issue tracker somewhere deep down, and accept that the tools are chosen by those people who do the real work. If they like Github issues and they make them productive, so be it. i'll use that as a launchpad for some general musings of state-of-the-art hosting tools i'm aware of. this is an invitation to discussion, and i find it interesting beyond the scope of mc. it's obvious at first sight that the github issue tracker provides much less formal structure than trac. and trac ain't that great to start with (especially on the workflow side, at least as configured for mc (i don't know what would be possible with a current version)). in github, almost everything is done with labels. it's nice and uncomplicated, but simply doesn't scale. on the migration side, it seems that it's impossible to fake issue reporters. incidentally, that's one of the two problems that i fixed last year in mc's issue import to trac because i found it so annoying. most advanced import tool i found: https://github.com/trustmaster/trac2github i find github's code review system terrible; it doesn't encourage the workflow i want (every commit being polished), and it doesn't scale, either. luckily, there is gerrithub.io to alleviate the problem. there is also an open-source clone of github: gitlab. it is really a look-alike, so it has pretty much all downsides of github, with the addition that no gerrit integration exists (yet). on the upside, the issue import is probably better. tool: https://gitlab.com/kevinlee/trac-issues-to-gitlab there is also bitbucket, but the free version is limited to teams of five, whatever that may mean in practice. anyone here has experience with it? yet another fully integrated solution (for own hosting) would be phabricator. no personal experience with it, either. ___ mc-devel mailing list https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/mc-devel
