[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Pete Bentley]

On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 10:07:09AM -0500, James Carlson wrote:
> Let's also take the whole "sponsor" question away, as that is a
> temporary issue that's being fixed.  

Sorry to sidetrack what is a very useful thread, but just how temporary
a problem is that likely to be?  And how about the situation where
the sponsor becomes unresponsive (possibly for very valid reasons)?

Case in point, bug 6445725 (newfs / zpool create on firewire device
hangs the OS) which really needs fixing before other contributors can
do useful work on the firewire subsystem. Jurgen Keil submitted a
working and reasonable looking (to me) patch well over a year ago,
and even prodded the sponsor back in August (see 
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2007-August/042143.html)
and yet this still appears to be "stuck".

Pete.

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Ceri Davies]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 11:15:40PM +, Ceri Davies wrote:
> It occurs to me that I've been reviewing patches posted here where it
> might not actually be welcome.  Tell me to shut up if necessary,
> although I'm concerned that this review should happen and preferably in
> good time after a submission is posted (rather than after the
> potentially long wait for a sponsor to come forward).

So the message that I'm getting is that reviews are not welcome here.
That's cool with me, it's why I asked.

However, allow me doomsay a little based on how I believe human nature
works.  I'm doing this so that we can hopefully throw ideas around about
how to "fix" this, since CfF and the Awards are only going to exacerbate
this.

Suppose Participant Alice snags bug 3, by sending a request to
request-sponsor saying that they are going to fix it.  They eventually
send a patch of poor quality; nobody reviews it.  In the meantime,
Participant Bob is also interested in bug 3, better placed to fix and
has a patch of good quality.  Since Alice got there first, bug 3 will
now not get fixed until someone steps forward to sponsor her which,
since they know the patch is poor, they will be less inclined to do.

This means that while the bug could get fixed quickly and easily by
using Bob's patch, in reality it won't get fixed for a long time, even
if it's very simple.

What I'm trying to achieve is to, at the very least, get Alice up to
a point where somebody might be interested in at least working with her
on getting a correct patch out so that a potential sponsor (who, let's
face it, have real jobs to do too) can be bothered to choose that bug to
work on.

Does anyone else agree that this might be a problem, and are they able
to see a way out?

Ceri
-- 
That must be wonderful!  I don't understand it at all.
  -- Moliere
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[James Carlson]

Pete Bentley writes:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 10:07:09AM -0500, James Carlson wrote:
> > Let's also take the whole "sponsor" question away, as that is a
> > temporary issue that's being fixed.  
> 
> Sorry to sidetrack what is a very useful thread, but just how temporary
> a problem is that likely to be?

I don't have an exact date quite yet, but if you're interested in the
solution to the problem, I suggest checking out the SCM Migration
project.

I'd _estimate_ that it'd likely happen by summer time.  The big gating
item right now is tools -- we need people to test the new tools,
review the changes that are being made, and (in some cases) to
volunteer to make the necessary updates.

>  And how about the situation where
> the sponsor becomes unresponsive (possibly for very valid reasons)?

If the sponsor becomes unresponsive, then I'd suggest sending mail
here first to ask for a new sponsor, and (if that doesn't work) to
Bonnie Corwin directly pointing out the problem.  This shouldn't
happen.

> Case in point, bug 6445725 (newfs / zpool create on firewire device
> hangs the OS) which really needs fixing before other contributors can
> do useful work on the firewire subsystem. Jurgen Keil submitted a
> working and reasonable looking (to me) patch well over a year ago,
> and even prodded the sponsor back in August (see 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2007-August/042143.html)
> and yet this still appears to be "stuck".

You're not Jurgen Keil, so I think the first thing to do would be to
ask him.  I don't see the evidence that suggests that this is the
sponsor's problem rather than (possibly) some other problem that
merely hasn't been discussed on the list.

It's not unusual for a sponsor or a code reviewer to send private
feedback or a request for additional testing.  Those sorts of things
can cause delays that are otherwise hard to understand if you're not
part of that conversation.

But let's suppose you're right and the sponsor is the road block
here.  In that case, if you were Jurgen Keil, you'd look at both the
sponsor table:

  http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports/request_sponsor/

and the bug itself:

  http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6445725

Both show the RE as Alan Perry.  If contacting him doesn't work (I
don't know off hand if it does or doesn't work), then post here asking
for a sponsor who does respond.  If that doesn't work, then I'd
recommend asking Bonnie for help.

Cases like that should be quite unusual, and it's unclear to me
whether you've diagnosed a real problem in this instance or if you
just don't have enough information to make such a call.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking  
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[James Carlson]

Ceri Davies writes:
> What I'm trying to achieve is to, at the very least, get Alice up to
> a point where somebody might be interested in at least working with her
> on getting a correct patch out so that a potential sponsor (who, let's
> face it, have real jobs to do too) can be bothered to choose that bug to
> work on.
> 
> Does anyone else agree that this might be a problem, and are they able
> to see a way out?

It's indeed a problem to have a bug assigned to someone who is not
going to produce a viable fix, and I think we're seeing that problem
occurring now.

Not producing a viable fix can occur for many reasons.  You're citing
a particular though noteworthy case -- a poor-quality patch -- but
there are many others that happen in real life, including people who
start working on a problem but then get distracted elsewhere, or
instances where the bug becomes part of a bigger project, or those
times the submitter just falls under a bus.

Let's also take the whole "sponsor" question away, as that is a
temporary issue that's being fixed.  The one problem I see there --
the "there's already a request on the table" problem -- is an
artifact, but it's not the underlying problem.

The underlying problem is that Alice isn't going to fix the problem.
It has to be up to Bob to take it away from Alice.  If I were Bob, I'd
first send Alice a private message saying, "hey, it looks like you're
not working on 1243567, and I've got a good way to fix it; mind if I
take ownership?"  The answer (in my experience) is almost always "go
ahead," and the problem's solved.  Most submitters know when they're
either doing nothing or are completely under water.

If Alice doesn't respond or gives some unsatisfactory answer (in Bob's
eyes), I believe the escalation path ought to be the community group
responsible for the technology area.  Bob should compose a message
there saying, "Alice {has proposed an unworkable solution for, doesn't
appear to be working on} this bug, and I have a better solution
documented $HERE.  I request that the Core Contributors vote to
release this bug to me."  In the role of directing the technology, I
think the community group should have the power to release the bug
from another's grip.

If the community group itself doesn't agree with Bob, he should
certainly do some soul-searching.  If he still feels he's right and
the rest of the world is wrong, the OGB would be the natural next step
for such a conflict, but I'd hope that path would never be used, and
that it should almost never be successful.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking  
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[John Beck]

Ceri> Does anyone else agree that this might be a problem...

Yes.

Ceri> ... and are they able to see a way out?

For now, opensolaris-code is my best solution.  Bigger picture,
I'm trying to push to get our tools et al. migrated so we can
move the gate outside the firewall and ultimately transition
to true open development, which should make the whole sponsor
program moot.

-- John

http://blogs.sun.com/jbeck

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Avinash Joshi]

But how do we do a webrev?
I got the workspace at cr.opensolaris.org/~avinashj

Thanks & regards,
Avinash Joshi

On 1/31/08, Frank.Hofmann at sun.com  wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Antonello Cruz wrote:
>
> > James Carlson wrote:
> >> Seeing those submitters go to the relevant community or project
> >> mailing list with a proposed patch (or better yet a pointer to a
> >> webrev) would be greatly preferred, and if we can gently guide them
> >> there when they mistakenly post changes here, that'd be good.
> > Quick question: Do the contributors have access to the tools to generate
> > webrevs?
>
> If you've got a full opensolaris source tree, you'll find it in:
>
>   usr/src/tools/scripts/webrev.sh
>
> FrankH.
> ___
> request-sponsor mailing list
> request-sponsor at opensolaris.org
>

-- 
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com

Thanks & Regards,
Avinash Joshi
AM106IT015
Department of Information Technology
Amrita School of Engineering
Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham
Amritapuri Campus
Clappana P.O., Kollam 690 525
Kerala, INDIA
Ph : (+91) 98954 94427
Blog: http://avinashtjoshi.wordpress.com/
Site: http://avinashtjoshi.googlepages.com/

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[frank.hofm...@sun.com]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Avinash Joshi wrote:

> But how do we do a webrev?
> I got the workspace at cr.opensolaris.org/~avinashj

The manpage - usr/src/tools/scripts/webrev.1 - explains what you can do 
with it. Basically, you need to keep an unmodified ON sourcetree, take a 
clone of that, modify your files there, and then run webrev.

FrankH.

>
> Thanks & regards,
> Avinash Joshi
>
> On 1/31/08, Frank.Hofmann at sun.com  wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Antonello Cruz wrote:
>>
>>> James Carlson wrote:
 Seeing those submitters go to the relevant community or project
 mailing list with a proposed patch (or better yet a pointer to a
 webrev) would be greatly preferred, and if we can gently guide them
 there when they mistakenly post changes here, that'd be good.
>>> Quick question: Do the contributors have access to the tools to generate
>>> webrevs?
>>
>> If you've got a full opensolaris source tree, you'll find it in:
>>
>>  usr/src/tools/scripts/webrev.sh
>>
>> FrankH.
>> ___
>> request-sponsor mailing list
>> request-sponsor at opensolaris.org
>>
>
> -- 
> Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Avinash Joshi
> AM106IT015
> Department of Information Technology
> Amrita School of Engineering
> Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham
> Amritapuri Campus
> Clappana P.O., Kollam 690 525
> Kerala, INDIA
> Ph : (+91) 98954 94427
> Blog: http://avinashtjoshi.wordpress.com/
> Site: http://avinashtjoshi.googlepages.com/
>

--
No good can come from selling your freedom, not for all the gold in the world,
for the value of this heavenly gift far exceeds that of any fortune on earth.
--

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[frank.hofm...@sun.com]

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Antonello Cruz wrote:

> James Carlson wrote:
>> Seeing those submitters go to the relevant community or project
>> mailing list with a proposed patch (or better yet a pointer to a
>> webrev) would be greatly preferred, and if we can gently guide them
>> there when they mistakenly post changes here, that'd be good.
> Quick question: Do the contributors have access to the tools to generate
> webrevs?

If you've got a full opensolaris source tree, you'll find it in:

usr/src/tools/scripts/webrev.sh

FrankH.

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[James Carlson]

Tom Haynes writes:
> But, I'd like a forum for people to suggest patches, ask for reviews, 
> etc.

The best place to do that is in a relevant community or project.
That's where the expertise in that technical area is gathered.

> Instead of
> the exchanges being scattered over different communities (how does a 
> submitter
> even know the relevant communities/discussions),

A visit to www.opensolaris.org and looking at the community and
project descriptions might help.

If it doesn't, and the submitter don't even know what the code does or
what technical area it represents, then maybe a trip to the
opensolaris-code list first might be good.

Private email to the sponsor can also help.  Just ask, "so, what group
would you recommend that I consult about this change?"  I think the
sponsor is supposed to be a general resource and not just a person who
can type "putback."

> I want people new to the process to be able to read over other people's 
> questions,
> trials, and tribulations.

Yep, I understand.  And I think opensolaris-code is probably a more
appropriate area to do that sort of thing.  But once contributors get
_serious_ about doing development work, they really ought to be doing
it in the context of a community group or project that can provide
detailed technical guidance.

I think the OpenSolaris project is just too darned big to have a
single mailing list with "every" expert available.

> I know that is what the sponsor is supposed to do, but face it, we have 
> more requests
> for contribution than the sponsors have time.

Indeed; we're in a rough (though someone enviable) spot at the moment.

> Perhaps we point them to OpenSolaris: code? And modify this to reflect that:
> 
> 
> OpenSolaris: request-sponsor
> 
> 
> Use this list to request and obtain a sponsor for your contributions. 
> Once you have sponsor, please use a separate, community-specific alias 
> if appropriate, or 1:1 e-mail with your sponsor, for contribution details.

That sounds like a great idea.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking  
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Tom Haynes]

James Carlson wrote:
> "wx edit" seems fairly unlikely for an external (non-SWAN) user who
> doesn't have teamware access.
>
> Instead, you'll want to pull the hg-enabled tools from the SCM
> Migration web site:
>
>   http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/scm-migration/
>
>   

Just because I hit this problem with a contributer and because at least 
one person had
problems with Mercurial, I put together a blog entry that shows you how 
to use
webrev to get a code review:

http://blogs.sun.com/tdh/entry/getting_a_webrev_generated_for

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[James Carlson]

Antonello Cruz writes:
> After building the tools, go the the top of your workspace (I don't 
> think it will work on cr.opensolaris.org/~avinashj you'll have to do it 
> locally) and run 'ws' to set the environment.
> Then run wx webrev. However, for it to work, you'll have to properly 
> checkout the files you want to edit with
> wx edit 

"wx edit" seems fairly unlikely for an external (non-SWAN) user who
doesn't have teamware access.

Instead, you'll want to pull the hg-enabled tools from the SCM
Migration web site:

  http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/scm-migration/

(Look for "downloads" on that page.)

Those packages will install the necessary tools in /opt/onbld.  You
can then run "hgsetup" to set up your $HOME/.hgrc file to work with
the tools, and "webrev" will work as expected.  When you're ready for
review, just "scp -r" that webrev directory out to some web site (such
as cr.opensolaris.org).

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking  
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Tom Haynes]

James Carlson wrote:
> Ceri Davies writes:
>   
>> It occurs to me that I've been reviewing patches posted here where it
>> might not actually be welcome.  Tell me to shut up if necessary,
>> although I'm concerned that this review should happen and preferably in
>> good time after a submission is posted (rather than after the
>> potentially long wait for a sponsor to come forward).
>> 
>
> I'd much rather see request-sponsor used just for requesting a
> sponsor and not for submitting patches or for reviews.
>
> Yes, all changes need thorough review, and comments should always be
> welcome, but this just isn't the right forum for it.  Not everyone who
> should be looking at the proposed changes (or the review comments
> themselves) is actually on this list.
>
> Seeing those submitters go to the relevant community or project
> mailing list with a proposed patch (or better yet a pointer to a
> webrev) would be greatly preferred, and if we can gently guide them
> there when they mistakenly post changes here, that'd be good.
>
>   

I agree that contributers should not be submitting patches before they 
get a sponsor.
And I strongly agree that the patches should not be submitted before 
they are
compiled or run through 'wx nits' or 'wx pbchk'.

But, I'd like a forum for people to suggest patches, ask for reviews, 
etc. Instead of
the exchanges being scattered over different communities (how does a 
submitter
even know the relevant communities/discussions), a centralized resource 
would make it
easy for the contributers to get started.

I want people new to the process to be able to read over other people's 
questions,
trials, and tribulations.

I know that is what the sponsor is supposed to do, but face it, we have 
more requests
for contribution than the sponsors have time.

Perhaps we point them to OpenSolaris: code? And modify this to reflect that:


OpenSolaris: request-sponsor


Use this list to request and obtain a sponsor for your contributions. 
Once you have sponsor, please use a separate, community-specific alias 
if appropriate, or 1:1 e-mail with your sponsor, for contribution details.

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Tom Haynes]

Antonello Cruz wrote:
> Avinash,
>
> Have a look at usr/src/tools/README.tools
>
> After building the tools, go the the top of your workspace (I don't 
> think it will work on cr.opensolaris.org/~avinashj you'll have to do it 
> locally) and run 'ws' to set the environment.
> Then run wx webrev. However, for it to work, you'll have to properly 
> checkout the files you want to edit with
> wx edit 
>
> You can ask me further questions off the list if you need so.
>
>   

So where do we discuss how to help everyone trying to help?

I.e., others might have questions and watching your exchange can help. I 
know I looked for
some help on webrev to send to a contributer and couldn't find any right 
off the bat.

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Mike Kupfer]

> "acruz" == Antonello Cruz  writes:

acruz> Quick question: Do the contributors have access to the tools to
acruz> generate webrevs?

Yes, though the tools from the SCM Migration project[1] are likely to work
better than what's in the gate, especially with respect to webrev and
Mercurial.

mike

[1] http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/scm-migration/

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[James Carlson]

Ceri Davies writes:
> It occurs to me that I've been reviewing patches posted here where it
> might not actually be welcome.  Tell me to shut up if necessary,
> although I'm concerned that this review should happen and preferably in
> good time after a submission is posted (rather than after the
> potentially long wait for a sponsor to come forward).

I'd much rather see request-sponsor used just for requesting a
sponsor and not for submitting patches or for reviews.

Yes, all changes need thorough review, and comments should always be
welcome, but this just isn't the right forum for it.  Not everyone who
should be looking at the proposed changes (or the review comments
themselves) is actually on this list.

Seeing those submitters go to the relevant community or project
mailing list with a proposed patch (or better yet a pointer to a
webrev) would be greatly preferred, and if we can gently guide them
there when they mistakenly post changes here, that'd be good.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking  
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Antonello Cruz]

James Carlson wrote:
> Antonello Cruz writes:
>> After building the tools, go the the top of your workspace (I don't 
>> think it will work on cr.opensolaris.org/~avinashj you'll have to do it 
>> locally) and run 'ws' to set the environment.
>> Then run wx webrev. However, for it to work, you'll have to properly 
>> checkout the files you want to edit with
>> wx edit 
> 
> "wx edit" seems fairly unlikely for an external (non-SWAN) user who
> doesn't have teamware access.
I only mentioned wx edit because it *is* in usr/src/tools/scripts
But I do agree that using Mercurial (hg) is a better choice.

Antonello

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Antonello Cruz]

Avinash,

Have a look at usr/src/tools/README.tools

After building the tools, go the the top of your workspace (I don't 
think it will work on cr.opensolaris.org/~avinashj you'll have to do it 
locally) and run 'ws' to set the environment.
Then run wx webrev. However, for it to work, you'll have to properly 
checkout the files you want to edit with
wx edit 

You can ask me further questions off the list if you need so.

Antonello

Avinash Joshi wrote:
> But how do we do a webrev?
> I got the workspace at cr.opensolaris.org/~avinashj
> 
> Thanks & regards,
> Avinash Joshi
> 
> On 1/31/08, Frank.Hofmann at sun.com  wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Antonello Cruz wrote:
>>
>>> James Carlson wrote:
 Seeing those submitters go to the relevant community or project
 mailing list with a proposed patch (or better yet a pointer to a
 webrev) would be greatly preferred, and if we can gently guide them
 there when they mistakenly post changes here, that'd be good.
>>> Quick question: Do the contributors have access to the tools to generate
>>> webrevs?
>> If you've got a full opensolaris source tree, you'll find it in:
>>
>>  usr/src/tools/scripts/webrev.sh
>>
>> FrankH.
>> ___
>> request-sponsor mailing list
>> request-sponsor at opensolaris.org
>>
> 

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Antonello Cruz]

James Carlson wrote:
> Seeing those submitters go to the relevant community or project
> mailing list with a proposed patch (or better yet a pointer to a
> webrev) would be greatly preferred, and if we can gently guide them
> there when they mistakenly post changes here, that'd be good.
Quick question: Do the contributors have access to the tools to generate 
webrevs?

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Roland Mainz]

Ceri Davies wrote:
> 
> It occurs to me that I've been reviewing patches posted here where it
> might not actually be welcome.  Tell me to shut up if necessary,
> although I'm concerned that this review should happen and preferably in
> good time after a submission is posted (rather than after the
> potentially long wait for a sponsor to come forward).

I'm not sure but AFAIK review comments should always be welcome... I
wouldn't worry that much... :-)



Bye,
Roland

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
  \__\/\/__/  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
  /O /==\ O\  TEL +49 641 7950090
 (;O/ \/ \O;)

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Ceri Davies]

It occurs to me that I've been reviewing patches posted here where it
might not actually be welcome.  Tell me to shut up if necessary,
although I'm concerned that this review should happen and preferably in
good time after a submission is posted (rather than after the
potentially long wait for a sponsor to come forward).

Ceri
-- 
That must be wonderful!  I don't understand it at all.
  -- Moliere
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 

[request-sponsor] Shooting my mouth off

[Tom Haynes]

Ceri Davies wrote:
> It occurs to me that I've been reviewing patches posted here where it
> might not actually be welcome.  Tell me to shut up if necessary,
> although I'm concerned that this review should happen and preferably in
> good time after a submission is posted (rather than after the
> potentially long wait for a sponsor to come forward).
>
> Ceri
>   
> 
>
> ___
> request-sponsor mailing list
> request-sponsor at opensolaris.org
>   

I think if a patch is posted before a sponsor signs up, then all bets 
are off.

I don't want input solely from people who have a .sun.com mail address.

What I would like to see happen by the way, is that all sponsored bugs 
get code
reviewed in the open. The webrevs go up on cr.opensolaris.org and the code
review request go to either this list or something like 
request-review at opensolaris.org.
And you could also throw in some project specific list if needed. I.e., 
I'll send
mine to nfs-discuss.