[RFC] gnucash-patches mailing list

[Neil Williams]

On Thursday 08 December 2005 9:29 pm, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
>   - gnucash-patches is being use for two very different purposes; 1)
> user patch submission, 2) syndication of commit messages.

When I subscribed, I expected gnucash-changes to be the automated logs and 
gnucash-patches for submissions. To me, that is more intuitive.

> Goals:
>   - I want the user-submitted patches and follow-up discussion to get
> a lot of visibility.
>   - I'd love to unsubscribe from the commit message syndication and cut
> my gnucash-related email in half.

As long as the diffs still come through so that each of us is aware if someone 
commits a change that maybe conflicts with local development code or contains 
a flaw that would be obvious to someone else.

SVN diffs -> gnucash-changes because the code has changed.
patches -> gnucash-patches because the patch needs to be applied.

Cease all current svn direction to gnucash-patches.

Overall, that's is the most intuitive IMHO plus it means the fewest changes to 
existing arrangements. All we need to do is declare how it's done and stop 
the hook from svn to gnucash-patches.

> I propose that we make gnucash-patches read-only, i.e.

I'd go for the opposite - leave gnucash-patches as is - read-write.

Make gnucash-changes the ONLY output for SVN messages, almost as is. That 
could be read-only.

>   - document that user-submitted code should be sent to -devel

-patches.

>   - allow posts to -patches only from svn commit hook

allow posts to -changes only from svn commit hook (because the code has been 
changed)

>   - set ReplyTo as gnucash-devel, so any response to a commit-message
> goes to -devel

Agreed.

>   - gnucash-patches becomes essentially only a syndication of commit
(gnucash-changes)

> messages, which some people seem to want.

The naming seems obtuse - patches are what come in, changes are what we make.

When a developer with svn access makes a commit, that is a change to the 
codebase - gnucash-changes.

When a developer/user without svn access creates a patch, it would seem 
natural to send that to gnucash-patches.

Once applied, it goes onto gnucash-changes.

> Disclaimer: I have diminishing sympathy for any self-proclaimed
> non-developers who might say that they want to remain subscribed to
> -devel but don't want user-sumbitted patches crowding their inbox.

Agreed. I see no reason for the current messages from SVN to gnucash-patches 
(never have really). I think they should stop and leave gnucash-patches only 
for contributed code and gnucash-changes only for commit messages *with* 
diffs.

-- 

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20051208/bfd13f1c/attachment.bin