[RFC] gnucash-patches mailing list

[Andrew Sackville-West]

!uproar

I've said it before, as a serious -devel lurker, I have zero (! ((char 
*)NULL || (void *)0)) problem with code on -devel and would like to see 
more of it frankly. I am hoping to learn by osmosis. So your reasons 
(Chris) for seeing more code on -devel suit me just fine.

A

Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 10:44:36PM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> 
>>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.
> 
> 
> I proposed this before and it was not received too favorably.  I
> pretty much agree with you about the uselessness of sending commit
> messages to -patches, but some people seem to want this.
> 
> OTOH, I still don't like the idea of segmenting out a list just for
> submission and discussion of a few patches.  So, combining what I
> agree with about your proposal with what I want to retain from my
> proposal would mean the complete elimination of -patches.  I can't say
> I'd mind.
> 
> 
>>>  - 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.
> 
> 
> I agree that the naming is totally backward for what I'm proposing.
> If renaming the list was easy I'd call it "gnucash-commit-log".
> 
> 
>>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.
> 
> 
> Well, we agree about reducing the dual use of -patches.  And if
> there's no uproar, I'd agree with you about dropping the commit-log,
> too.  But I still think it's better to concentrate eyeballs onto one
> list instead of -devel and -patches.
> 
> Part of my motivation is that I think developers are grown by example.
> Segregating patch submission means that lots of "aspiring" developers
> won't actually see any user submitting code, because they'd subscribe
> to -devel but not -patches.  OTOH, when all of the aspiring developers
> on -devel see the occasional fellow-user submitting patches, it
> fosters thoughts like "Oh, so that's how people submit patches" and
> "Hmm, maybe I can do that, too."
> 
> IOW, reducing my mail flow is really only the fringe benefit.  My real
> motivation is community development.
> 
> -chris
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-devel mailing list
> gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
>