On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se wrote:
ron minnich wrote:
I would like to request a better patch management system than this mailing list.
it's a hard problem.
..
All in all, I think the process works.
I don't, when patches are untracked and linger for however long until the author or someone else sends a ping, at which point they may get some more attention, or will just continue to linger.
all patches or some patches? Every time I svn, which is almost daily, there are changes.
Clearly, some patches are being reviewed and acked.
Especially when there is no feedback,
OK, I'm guilty here. I don't review every patch. Does anyone? Could anyone?
There is some bit of burden here on people who submit patches. A patch needs to be very clear as to: - what is the issue - how is the issue solved - why is it solved in this way
We do get patches from time to time that are confusing. I see it happen. We get a patch, for example, which solves a problem that nobody understood to be a problem, and that is not clear as to how it solves the problem. It is sometimes unclear that the patch is a good idea. At the same time, it's hard to take the time to write up just why (in my case) I'm not comfortable with or don't understand the patch.
No code review system, however automated, can fix that kind of problem.
Again, I see this problem on other projects. On these other projects I've seen: - patches that fix a design problem that people aren't willing to admit is a design problem - patches that fix an implementation problem -- same story, it's hard to get people to get it and at some point you give up - patches that add a very nice capability -- people argue about silly things and avoid the main point - patches that fix a problem -- badly -- such that nobody ever takes it in, and it dies a lingering, but well-deserved death.
I've seen all these scenarios on coreboot. I've submitted bad patches that got NAK'ed or died. I've submitted stuff I thought we ought to have, same experience. I've wrongly ACK'ed and NAK'ed patches.
It happens. We're fallible. But again, v2 rev level is 4224 or so, which means that in some way, the system worked at least 4000 times.
All that said, if somebody wants to try out and evangelize one of these improved systems, and it can improve our life, why not try it? Computers are there to remove drudgery from our lives and smooth our path for us -- let's use them :-)
thanks
ron