Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2018, #01; Thu, 2)

From: Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
Date: Aug 3, 2018, 19:32 UTC
Message-ID: <20180803193256.GA164578@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqk1p7wa7t.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On 08/03, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> 
> > "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:
> >
> >> On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 11:40:08AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >>> "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:
> >>> 
> >>> > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 04:02:36PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------
> >>> >> [New Topics]
> >>> >
> >>> > I had expected to see
> >>> > <20180729192803.1047050-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> (the refspec @
> >>> > handling) in this list, but I don't.  Were you expecting changes or
> >>> > additional feedback before picking it up?
> >>> 
> >>> Neither.  I just am not all that interested in seeing @ used for
> >>> HEAD in the first place, as I find it quite confusing.

Discussion on our contributor workflow (and potentially adjusting or changing it) tends to be an area that can result in heated discussion, I would like to avoid that. At some point I would really like it if we could have a constructive discussion on how to improve our workflow as well as make things easier for newcomers. Maybe this isn't the time or place but I find this situation particularly challenging as a contributor.

Someone sent a patch to the list, they received a review (which doesn't happen all the time because no one is assigned to review a patches) and then they wait. Our project doesn't have a bug tracker (yes jrn you'll say we have one, https://crbug.com/git/, but its not very discoverable and the project as a whole hasn't started using it) (and I mention a bug tracker because that's also a place which could be used to communicate the 'status' of a series), and it doesn't make use of a code review tool which has a definitive status of a patch series. As a contributor I'm left waiting and unsure of if my patch series needs more review, do I need to send a re-roll, does the project not like the idea and I should drop it, or the patch is good as-is and will be merged.

When I started contributing to the project I was told that these "What's cooking" emails were supposed to be that status[1]. I knew that they weren't real-time but it meant that I could at least get an idea about once or twice a week about the various status' of ongoing series in the project. When something is just silently omitted, what is a contributor to think? Even if someone sends something that the project isn't interested in taking, shouldn't they at least get informed of that?

Anyway those are just some of my thoughts. If my thinking is mistaken or I'm missing something please point it out to me.

[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CAGZ79kYGS4DvoetyGX01ciNrxxLCqgXoVSpLhmgYZ8B51LzhSg@mail.gmail.com/ This mail seems to counter that indicating that the "What's Cooking" emails should not be used as a status update.

-- 
Brandon Williams