From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id KBi2HfEXN2b/mgYAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 05 May 2024 01:24:01 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=Mmzmie39; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 73A131E0C1; Sun, 5 May 2024 01:24:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E6D81E030 for ; Sun, 5 May 2024 01:23:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99932386F435 for ; Sun, 5 May 2024 05:23:58 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 99932386F435 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1714886638; bh=0ZTPSP1cPahQTTvbqkPaGiY7fGxJtWdgN/mUD9NEZ+8=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=Mmzmie39i1wDLriniqSaR5d9jVJ49MhNzByh6VrnMp8Cu2xA/e8knsuDsvDtV1Kb5 qOb0dr9gKR7nQsxBXXWCP352xUwayf2lGlXIwCV6kRwrvUznvCJo9XjURZXtvPZuqG TdDwiqKn84pwBMnJpbTk/kEuo2uVXwxbK4EhQe/w= Received: from wfhigh3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wfhigh3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.154]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD644385B50A; Sun, 5 May 2024 05:23:10 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org CD644385B50A ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org CD644385B50A ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1714886592; cv=none; b=aenCbk0ADYJyjEoHCd+wRifFc1yhZbhMBZvDNNh/7pniwp5Lk5GbCB7vrHqMxDmoMjNZo5Xu5HdziHRnGcyjQYLKvcFXJQpmbh5BH0+8IGqXSASOGhmxhPddgwxumrTQRiNSIo47dCT6cpUmWCMmmWOlwz+lLbMm8SEeGGbeNT8= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1714886592; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ysvUAwgcX9wHGvzzq15wlFQjaBTRScpCIkGO+Za7Nr0=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:To: From:Subject; b=rQRYNydfgrGBucVXh4Xten0DpD+AMeFneuV1jfijd6fdtdm9SZ98oJhsXgP7hw9/Wizh1Bns9jk5kdRbxqDUY74ixQHVStrthaaMj9QmAURuYyVKwYj6L7xvB/dnFpMvJimEzbSsDTF6T6Na7EHiWzrjGlwkIr0PYk9e8FDqNMc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfhigh.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B7F018000D1; Sun, 5 May 2024 01:23:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 05 May 2024 01:23:08 -0400 X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrvddvfedgleeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepkfffgggfvfevfhfhufgjtgfgsehtkeertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpeeuvghn shhonhcuofhuihhtvgcuoegsvghnshhonhgpmhhuihhtvgesvghmrghilhhplhhushdroh hrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepuddtvdegheeltdetvdeuvedvudeileeffeetiedu heekfeekudfhfeejkefgueegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpe hmrghilhhfrhhomhepsggvnhhsohhnpghmuhhithgvsegvmhgrihhlphhluhhsrdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: ic1e8415a:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 5 May 2024 01:22:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 5 May 2024 08:22:12 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.1 Content-Language: en-US To: Overseers mailing list , Mark Wielaard Cc: Ben Boeckel , Jeff Law , Joseph Myers , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Jason Merrill , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sourceware.org, Sergio Durigan Junior , binutils@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey References: <20240417232725.GC25080@gnu.wildebeest.org> <20240418173726.GD9069@redhat.com> <87v849qudy.fsf@tromey.com> <87wmooep76.fsf@tromey.com> <0347e05a-94c6-4ecc-aa8f-cc90358a813d@gmail.com> <0d0af1d9-21f8-4c60-ad4c-cd82c0c0cabb@redhat.com> <20240501212618.GB6469@gnu.wildebeest.org> Subject: Re: Updated Sourceware infrastructure plans In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Benson Muite via Gdb Reply-To: Benson Muite Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" On 04/05/2024 22.56, Ben Boeckel via Overseers wrote: > On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 23:26:18 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: >> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 04:04:37PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > >> At the moment though the only thing people seem to agree on is that >> any system will be based on git. So the plan for now is to first setup >> a larger git(olite) system so that every contributor (also those who >> don't currently have commit access) can easily "post" their git >> repo. This can then hopefully integrate with the systems we already >> have setup (triggering builder CI, flag/match with patchwork/emails, >> etc.) or any future "pull request" like system. It may be helpful to determine minimal forge features that people find useful and make these into a standard. This would enable interoperability and automation. In addition to Git, other tools such as Sapling, Mercurial, Fossil and Subversion are also used and are more suitable for many projects. > > As a fellow FOSS maintainer I definitely appreciate the benefit of being > email-based (`mutt` is far better at wrangling notifications from > umpteen places than…well basically any website is at even their own), > but as a *contributor* it is utterly opaque. It's not always clear if my > patch has been seen, if it is waiting on maintainer time, or for me to > do something. After one review, what is the courtesy time before pushing > a new patchset to avoid a review "crossing in the night" as I push more > patches? Did I get everyone that commented on the patch the first time > in the Cc list properly? Is a discussion considered resolved (FWIW, > Github is annoying with its conversation resolution behavior IMO; > GitLab's explicit closing is much better). Has it been merged? To the > right place? And that's for patches I author; figuring out the status of > patches I'm interested in but not the author of is even harder. A forge > surfaces a lot of this information pretty well and, to me, GitLab at > least offers usable enough email messages (e.g., discussions on threads > will thread in email too) that the public tracking of such things is far > more useful on the whole. This is an area that also needs standardization of important functionality. Some method of archiving the content is also helpful - email does this well but typically does not offer dashboard. Sourcehut makes reading threads using the web interface very easy. Web interfaces are difficult to automate, but friendlier for occasional use and encouraging new contributions. Tools separate from the version control system such as Gerrit, Phabricator, Rhode Code and Review Board also enable discussion management and overview.