public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Jon Nelson <[email protected]>
To: Phil Sorber <[email protected]>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
Cc: Josh Berkus <[email protected]>
Cc: Daniel Farina <[email protected]>
Cc: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Considering Gerrit for CFs
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 14:31:21 -0600
Message-ID: <CAKuK5J0WyuA3m3eSJw2yiaD+8UbXtg1RQ7tusj4yTDyPStzBzg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADAkt-iR926eOtvwnWf+dY_qHmwqsb5jBxtbhJHkhYEmBPYrFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
<CABUevEyEyYZ58717QeVutJ0bgiN1fKDb0EEObVNax0+cZQRdJA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<CAAZKuFbXkGs_Dw-cNQ3LyU-d3JPVsKJ69mFkXBwk3HEtZcwyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CABUevEyU2eYCP1c-kFZtVckVm2w89RxBJwd37KoAeVpjg2b5bg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CABUevEw05qLGNnP1ZoPoqv4i9RVwZkwRhJrcBohsPs_yzk4zqg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CADAkt-iR926eOtvwnWf+dY_qHmwqsb5jBxtbhJHkhYEmBPYrFQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Phil Sorber <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2/8/13 5:23 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> But do you have any actual proof that the problem is in "we
>>> loose reviewers because we're relying on email"?
>>
>> Here is one: Me.
>>
>> Just yesterday I downloaded a piece of software that was previously
>> unknown to me from GitHub and found a bug. Within 15 minutes or so I
>> had fixed the bug, made a fork, sent a pull request. Today I read, the
>> fix was merged last night, and I'm happy.
>>
>> How would this go with PostgreSQL? You can use the bug form on the web
>> site, but you can't attach any code, so the bug will just linger and
>> ultimately put more burden on a core contributor to deal with the
>> minutiae of developing, testing, and committing a trivial fix and
>> sending feedback to the submitter. Or the user could take the high road
>> and develop and patch and submit it. Just make sure it's in context
>> diff format! Search the wiki if you don't know how to do that! Send it
>> to -hackers, your email will be held for moderation. We won't actually
>> do anything with your patch, but we will tell you to add it to that
>> commitfest app over there. You need to sign up for an account to use
>> that. We will deal with your patch in one or two months. But only if
>> you review another patch. And you should sign up for that other mailing
>> list, to make sure you're doing it right. Chances are, the first review
>> you're going to get is that your patch doesn't apply anymore, but which
>> time you will have lost interest in the patch anyway.
>
> This. This times 1000.
I, too, could not agree more.
> I'm not sure if Gerrit specifically is the answer, but there are
> definitely better ways to do code review like this. I really like the
> way github allows you to post a patch and then have conversation
> around it, offer comments on specific lines of code, and add updates
> to the patch all in one interface. Another benefit is that a lot more
> people are familiar and comfortable with this work flow. There are
> even some open source work-a-likes that we could use to we don't have
> to rely on a 3rd party like github. Gerrit seems to do it slightly
> differently with side by side diff's and patch revisions, but either
> way would be an improvement.
Please take this for what it's worth - I'm not a code reviewer or
committer - just a pretty heavy user, and I lurk on (most?) of the
mailing lists.
Mostly I find bugs and ask others to fix them, since I lack the
necessary intimate knowledge of postgresql internals to produce a
meaningful patch. That said, I believe that - from my perspective -
having postgresql's interaction with it's *large* community would only
be improved by using something like github. I am far more likely to
try to introduce a new feature, minor bugfix, code improvement, et
cetera when using github than I would be if the interaction starts
with a post to a mailing list and at least /looks/ like it might
involve rather more than that.
--
Jon
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
view thread (35+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Considering Gerrit for CFs
In-Reply-To: <CAKuK5J0WyuA3m3eSJw2yiaD+8UbXtg1RQ7tusj4yTDyPStzBzg@mail.gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox