[Please excuse my ranting... :-)] I've received the first round of notification message from the patch manager and can't really say that I like them. Ok, I understand that the patch manager is still alpha or beta software, but these messages really don't have any usable content at all: """ Patch #100646 has been updated. Visit SourceForge.net for more info. http://sourceforge.net/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=100646&group_id=5470 """ Also, reviewing the patches has become a pain and discussing them is nearly impossible (I don't consider the slashdot like comment mechanism to be of any use: there's simply no audience for discussion). Is there any chance of tee'ing patches from SF to the patches list or some other patch discussion and review forum ? I do understand that the mechanism can help with patch *checkins*, but it's certainly not going to help much with the discussion step needed before conidering any actions. The independent peer review principal doesn't work with this kind of setup. Ok, enough whining, let's get on with business now ;-) -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
On Tue, 27 Jun 2000, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
I've received the first round of notification message from the patch manager and can't really say that I like them.
I wish i could propose Roundup, but it currently lacks the ability to decode e-mail attachments. Aside from that, it has reasonable (if basic) e-mail handling, colour-coded status and priorities, and so on. I would jump on it in a second except that the Software Carpentry deadline is also this Friday and i'm still barely pulling that thing together. Of course, if you feel like hacking it up to do attachments feel free to get it at http://pingster.com/roundup.html and hack away! Alternatively i suppose you could keep the patch files on SourceForge and do the discussions in Roundup as an interim solution? Messy, i know, but it might be an improvement. -- ?!ng
mal wrote:
I've received the first round of notification message from the patch manager and can't really say that I like them. Ok, I understand that the patch manager is still alpha or beta software, but these messages really don't have any usable content at all:
""" Patch #100646 has been updated. Visit SourceForge.net for more info.
http://sourceforge.net/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=100646&group_id=5470 """
Also, reviewing the patches has become a pain and discussing them is nearly impossible (I don't consider the slashdot like comment mechanism to be of any use: there's simply no audience for discussion).
Is there any chance of tee'ing patches from SF to the patches list or some other patch discussion and review forum ? I do understand that the mechanism can help with patch *checkins*, but it's certainly not going to help much with the discussion step needed before conidering any actions. The independent peer review principal doesn't work with this kind of setup.
I fully agree. someone really needs to fuse the patch manager with roundup (that we should use roundup for bug tracking goes without saying...) how much work would it be to move the entire repository over to pythonlabs, btw? sourceforget is frustratingly slow... </F>
Maybe the right solution is to work with the SourceForge maintainers to make roundup part of the standard support software. jeremy
On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 10:06:30PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
how much work would it be to move the entire repository over to pythonlabs, btw? sourceforget is frustratingly slow...
rsync access to the CVS repository would be nice too. rsync should be faster than "cvs update". Also, once you have the whole repository making diffs and checking out different versions is much faster. Neil -- "I saw `cout' being shifted "Hello world" times to the left and stopped right there." -- Steve Gonedes
"NS" == Neil Schemenauer <nascheme@enme.ucalgary.ca> writes:
NS> On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 10:06:30PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
how much work would it be to move the entire repository over to pythonlabs, btw? sourceforget is frustratingly slow...
NS> rsync access to the CVS repository would be nice too. rsync NS> should be faster than "cvs update". Also, once you have the NS> whole repository making diffs and checking out different NS> versions is much faster. Absolutely! OpenSSL works this way and I find it much more convenient than using a remote CVS server. I use commands like diff, log, and annotate frequently during development. Have you suggested that as a SourceForge feature? Jeremy
[MAL]
[Please excuse my ranting... :-)]
No problem -- you're not complaining about *our* software <wink>.
I've received the first round of notification message from the patch manager and can't really say that I like them. Ok, I understand that the patch manager is still alpha or beta software, but these messages really don't have any usable content at all:
""" Patch #100646 has been updated. Visit SourceForge.net for more info.
http://sourceforge.net/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=100646&group_id=5470
"""
I expect the title of the patch was also in the Subject line, yes? And a live link to the patch is certainly "usable". I've found both those right on target as I've been assigned or deassigned to patches so far, although I'd sure like to see something in the body saying exactly *what* about the patch "has been updated". Not saying I think it's good enough, am saying it's (barely) a start.
Also, reviewing the patches has become a pain
I don't understand that, in that the text of the patch is what you got before, and what you can get now. Is your complaint here specifically that patches don't show up in your mailbox by magic? Or something else?
and discussing them is nearly impossible (I don't consider the slashdot like comment mechanism to be of any use: there's simply no audience for discussion).
Wholly agreed there. So use python-dev for discussions for now; I agree too with Guido that the rampant but inconsistent x-posting between patches and python-dev was part of the problem.
Is there any chance of tee'ing patches from SF to the patches list or some other patch discussion and review forum ?
I expect you know as much about SF's possibilities as anyone <0.5 wink>: don't know. The SF docs are either non-existent or inadequate, far as I can tell, and I believe I share a mistaken belief with Fred Drake that new patches "should" *already* be showing up on the patches list.
I do understand that the mechanism can help with patch *checkins*,
Yes, but not yet as much as it should (e.g., the default view of patches lacks basic info like the patch current status, and there's apparently not yet any way to define a different view).
but it's certainly not going to help much with the discussion step needed before conidering any actions.
Python-Dev now, possibly roundup later. OTOH, it's perfectly adequate for tiny little principal-reviewer <-> submitter give-and-take; many patches are really quite trivial.
The independent peer review principal doesn't work with this kind of setup.
I think your view is warped on this one, as you've been in the extremely favored position of pumping out crucial patches for a hot area. Most other peoples' patches have been flatly ignored for *months* now. It's not necessarily bad if other people get some attention now too <wink>.
[Fredrik Lundh]
... how much work would it be to move the entire repository over to pythonlabs, btw?
Impossibly more than we could make time for soon.
sourceforget is frustratingly slow...
'Tis very erratic indeed. It *can* be speedy, but that seems much more the exception than the rule.
On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 08:11:52PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
[Fredrik Lundh]
... how much work would it be to move the entire repository over to pythonlabs, btw?
Impossibly more than we could make time for soon.
sourceforget is frustratingly slow...
'Tis very erratic indeed. It *can* be speedy, but that seems much more the exception than the rule.
hehe... I have 30ms pings and have observed multiple Mb/sec :-) download.sourceforge.net is excellent given those stats... Of course, I'm practically just down the street. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
[Greg Stein]
hehe... I have 30ms pings and have observed multiple Mb/sec :-)
download.sourceforge.net is excellent given those stats...
Of course, I'm practically just down the street.
Would please send me the Python script you use to configure Win98 so that I can get multiple Mb/sec too? Thanks in advance. I always *knew* there was a secret way to boost these 56K laptop modems <wink>. keep-gloating-pal-and-we'll-move-everything-to-a-server-in-barry's- basement-ly y'rs - tim
On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 11:13:52PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
[Greg Stein]
hehe... I have 30ms pings and have observed multiple Mb/sec :-)
download.sourceforge.net is excellent given those stats...
Of course, I'm practically just down the street.
Would please send me the Python script you use to configure Win98 so that I can get multiple Mb/sec too? Thanks in advance. I always *knew* there was a secret way to boost these 56K laptop modems <wink>.
DSL big boy! DSL! And I use a real OS :-)
keep-gloating-pal-and-we'll-move-everything-to-a-server-in-barry's- basement-ly y'rs - tim
eek! -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
"TP" == Tim Peters <tim_one@email.msn.com> writes:
TP> keep-gloating-pal-and-we'll-move-everything-to-a-server-in-barry's- TP> basement-ly y'rs - tim Say the word, send me some hardware, and I'll clear a space between the drums, bass rig, and litter boxes. cover-it-in-sisal-and-even-the-cats'll-be-happy-ly y'rs, -Barry
Tim Peters wrote:
[MAL]
[Please excuse my ranting... :-)]
No problem -- you're not complaining about *our* software <wink>.
I've received the first round of notification message from the patch manager and can't really say that I like them. Ok, I understand that the patch manager is still alpha or beta software, but these messages really don't have any usable content at all:
""" Patch #100646 has been updated. Visit SourceForge.net for more info.
http://sourceforge.net/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=100646&group_id=5470
"""
I expect the title of the patch was also in the Subject line, yes?
Right, but that's just about all the information you get: the title, the fact that something changed and a link to the patch page.
And a live link to the patch is certainly "usable". I've found both those right on target as I've been assigned or deassigned to patches so far, although I'd sure like to see something in the body saying exactly *what* about the patch "has been updated".
Not saying I think it's good enough, am saying it's (barely) a start.
True and I don't want to put this down. The only reason for my ranting is that I'd rather get more infos in mail than via some link to a page. Discussing patches via quoting email is just so much more convenient -- opening two or three browsers to get at the hard facts isn't and, as others have already noted, is rather slow too.
Also, reviewing the patches has become a pain
I don't understand that, in that the text of the patch is what you got before, and what you can get now. Is your complaint here specifically that patches don't show up in your mailbox by magic? Or something else?
I would very much prefer to get the patches or changes appended to the update messages (much like was manually done on patches@python.org). That way I can read the patch and then reply to the sender and the list community from within the mail application -- without copy&paste, looking up email addresses in SF etc.
and discussing them is nearly impossible (I don't consider the slashdot like comment mechanism to be of any use: there's simply no audience for discussion).
Wholly agreed there. So use python-dev for discussions for now; I agree too with Guido that the rampant but inconsistent x-posting between patches and python-dev was part of the problem.
Is there any chance of tee'ing patches from SF to the patches list or some other patch discussion and review forum ?
I expect you know as much about SF's possibilities as anyone <0.5 wink>: don't know. The SF docs are either non-existent or inadequate, far as I can tell, and I believe I share a mistaken belief with Fred Drake that new patches "should" *already* be showing up on the patches list.
They are showing up there... at least new ones are. Discussions (via posting comments on the patch page) are not relayed to the list though: only the comment authors get an email.
I do understand that the mechanism can help with patch *checkins*,
Yes, but not yet as much as it should (e.g., the default view of patches lacks basic info like the patch current status, and there's apparently not yet any way to define a different view).
but it's certainly not going to help much with the discussion step needed before conidering any actions.
Python-Dev now, possibly roundup later. OTOH, it's perfectly adequate for tiny little principal-reviewer <-> submitter give-and-take; many patches are really quite trivial.
True, but even small patches occasionally need peer review from more people than just the assigned developer.
The independent peer review principal doesn't work with this kind of setup.
I think your view is warped on this one, as you've been in the extremely favored position of pumping out crucial patches for a hot area. Most other peoples' patches have been flatly ignored for *months* now. It's not necessarily bad if other people get some attention now too <wink>.
Oops, did it shine through that much ? ;-) Seriously, I would like to see a processing speedup too, it's just the workflow that bothers me a bit. BTW, another great feature for the patch manager would be a button to perform the actual checkin via the web interface. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
participants (8)
-
bwarsaw＠beopen.com -
Fredrik Lundh -
Greg Stein -
Jeremy Hylton -
Ka-Ping Yee -
M.-A. Lemburg -
Neil Schemenauer -
Tim Peters