You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@nuttx.apache.org by Sebastien Lorquet <se...@lorquet.fr> on 2019/12/23 16:06:33 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
OK.
That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these
discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads full
of heated opinions in 2-3 days is insane.
I just cant dedicate enough time reading any more of this. I have other things
to do than trying to understand these multiple rebooted workflows proposals that
span days (and nights!) of discussions.
So I can't vote on anything. I dont understand what is going on anymore. I'm
lost. Probably not important since I did not ask and choose to be a committer,
but since opinions are asked, here are mine.
Can someone please sum up what we have to decide in a short email, less than a page?
To be honest, viewed from here, I just seem to understand that some opinions are
very pushy and are trying to act before decisions are settled.
Also some kind of extra-heavy decisions on a full process NO ONE has been able
to install up to now for years.
I just want to say that going to apache should not be an occasion to try to
force the process of someone liking or another just because not everyone has an
equally stronger opinion and voice and free time for emails.
On my part, seeing too hard pushes in any specific direction just rings an alarm
bell to be extra-cautious.
I think the process should be as simple as possible, and improved later. Just
select the absolute bare minimum that could start to work and discard everything
else so this project can work again.
We are using git so things are reversable, right? We will not get this right the
first time, so lets keep room for errors. If I understand correctly the
bitbucket repositories are still in a consistent pre-apache state and the apache
ones can be reset? or is the apache->bb mirroring already active?
Also, I did not see a notification that the BB repositories had been frozen.
These workflow and reviewing discussions are just killing extremely valuable
time for everyone without visible progress (because too many messages).
So again, I would like to read a very short state of the union at monday
2019-Dec-23 17:01 UTC+1.
Otherwise I cant make decisions. And I guess I am not the only one.
Sebastien
Le 22/12/2019 à 17:25, Gregory Nutt a écrit :
>
>> Let's get everyone's thoughts on the table
>
> I suppose that we should keep the discussion for 72 hours then call the vote.
> We need to allow time for everyone to comment and with the holidays, we may
> not be able to get good feedback. Should we still call a vote if people are
> not participating?
>
> I will call the vote on your behalf in 72 hours.
>
> Greg
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Disruptive Solutions <di...@gmail.com>.
+1 keep it simple
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone
> Op 23 dec. 2019 om 17:06 heeft Sebastien Lorquet <se...@lorquet.fr> het volgende geschreven:
>
> OK.
>
> That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these
> discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads full
> of heated opinions in 2-3 days is insane.
>
> I just cant dedicate enough time reading any more of this. I have other things
> to do than trying to understand these multiple rebooted workflows proposals that
> span days (and nights!) of discussions.
>
> So I can't vote on anything. I dont understand what is going on anymore. I'm
> lost. Probably not important since I did not ask and choose to be a committer,
> but since opinions are asked, here are mine.
>
>
> Can someone please sum up what we have to decide in a short email, less than a page?
>
>
> To be honest, viewed from here, I just seem to understand that some opinions are
> very pushy and are trying to act before decisions are settled.
>
> Also some kind of extra-heavy decisions on a full process NO ONE has been able
> to install up to now for years.
>
> I just want to say that going to apache should not be an occasion to try to
> force the process of someone liking or another just because not everyone has an
> equally stronger opinion and voice and free time for emails.
>
> On my part, seeing too hard pushes in any specific direction just rings an alarm
> bell to be extra-cautious.
>
>
> I think the process should be as simple as possible, and improved later. Just
> select the absolute bare minimum that could start to work and discard everything
> else so this project can work again.
>
>
> We are using git so things are reversable, right? We will not get this right the
> first time, so lets keep room for errors. If I understand correctly the
> bitbucket repositories are still in a consistent pre-apache state and the apache
> ones can be reset? or is the apache->bb mirroring already active?
>
> Also, I did not see a notification that the BB repositories had been frozen.
>
>
> These workflow and reviewing discussions are just killing extremely valuable
> time for everyone without visible progress (because too many messages).
>
>
> So again, I would like to read a very short state of the union at monday
> 2019-Dec-23 17:01 UTC+1.
>
> Otherwise I cant make decisions. And I guess I am not the only one.
>
>
> Sebastien
>
>
>> Le 22/12/2019 à 17:25, Gregory Nutt a écrit :
>>
>>> Let's get everyone's thoughts on the table
>>
>> I suppose that we should keep the discussion for 72 hours then call the vote.
>> We need to allow time for everyone to comment and with the holidays, we may
>> not be able to get good feedback. Should we still call a vote if people are
>> not participating?
>>
>> I will call the vote on your behalf in 72 hours.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Gregory Nutt <sp...@gmail.com>.
> I think the process should be as simple as possible, and improved later. Just
> select the absolute bare minimum that could start to work and discard everything
> else so this project can work again.
Depends on what you mean by simple. Using some less-than-simple tools
can make the workflow very simple. I believe that we need to establish
a set of very high-level workflow requirements. Then we have the top
level roadmap that could guide a simple initial implementation and
could be improved later with the same objective in mind.
That does not preclude any change in direction, requirements can change
too. But the roadmap would be controlled by consensus approval (not the
implementation! only the roadmap). Such a roadmap would unify our
mindset and unify our sense of purpose. There is anarchy, rogue
behaviors, and distrust now that could be fixed by a simple
roadmap/high-level requirements that makes sense to everyone.
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Gregory Nutt <sp...@gmail.com>.
Agreed.. It is painful and awkward and I am not so optimistic at the
moment. We will have to give it more time and see if people and learn
to cooperate in groups or not.
> Also, I did not see a notification that the BB repositories had been frozen.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/nuttx/ISmgZAftm4o
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Gregory Nutt <sp...@gmail.com>.
> Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I
> know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but
> that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this
> list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page. (Hint:
> People who participate often become good candidates to become
> committers too!)
>
> The Workflow Work-In-Progress Confluence Page is here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NUTTXTEST/Code+Contribution+Workflow+--+Brennan+Ashton
There is a thread on
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/nuttx-dev/ called [CALL for
TOP Down workflow Requirements]. Currently it contains all workflow
thoughts. Please feel free to comment there mostly forwarded from other
discussion threads. There is not a lot there :'(, but that is what we
have to work with. We should probably keep discussion as terse as
possiblethere. These threads with 100's of responses are, as you note,
pretty difficult to follow. If we keep things terse then there is less
chance that you input will be lost in the clutter.
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Disruptive Solutions <di...@gmail.com>.
Ow and:
https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/intro-user.html
And not about tools... but they have implemented workflow...
Op ma 23 dec. 2019 om 23:24 schreef Disruptive Solutions <
disruptivesolutionsnl@gmail.com>:
> Did you look at https://www.atlassian.com/nl/software/crucible ??
> And: https://www.perforce.com/solutions/static-analysis
>
> https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows
>
> The concept "The Centralized Workflow" was the "old" workflow, but now
> maybe the concept "Feature branching" is maybe a way to go? Say there are
> people working on "features" in Nuttx? Drivers, Kernel, Apps, etc?? Or is
> "Gitflow" already" choosen?
>
> Ben
>
>
>
>
>
> Op ma 23 dec. 2019 om 20:27 schreef Justin Mclean
> <ju...@me.com.invalid>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I
>> > know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but
>> > that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this
>> > list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page.
>>
>> Non committers can also ask for access.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Disruptive Solutions <di...@gmail.com>.
Did you look at https://www.atlassian.com/nl/software/crucible ??
And: https://www.perforce.com/solutions/static-analysis
https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows
The concept "The Centralized Workflow" was the "old" workflow, but now
maybe the concept "Feature branching" is maybe a way to go? Say there are
people working on "features" in Nuttx? Drivers, Kernel, Apps, etc?? Or is
"Gitflow" already" choosen?
Ben
Op ma 23 dec. 2019 om 20:27 schreef Justin Mclean
<ju...@me.com.invalid>:
> Hi,
>
> > Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I
> > know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but
> > that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this
> > list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page.
>
> Non committers can also ask for access.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com.INVALID>.
Hi,
> Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I
> know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but
> that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this
> list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page.
Non committers can also ask for access.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?
Posted by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 11:06 AM Sebastien Lorquet <se...@lorquet.fr> wrote:
>
> OK.
>
> That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these
> discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads full
> of heated opinions in 2-3 days is insane.
>
> I just cant dedicate enough time reading any more of this. I have other things
> to do than trying to understand these multiple rebooted workflows proposals that
> span days (and nights!) of discussions.
It helps if you have a mail client that can display messages in
threaded mode. If not, you could (for example) create a gmail account.
Gmail automatically groups related emails. This has the advantage of
separating the volume of NuttX emails from your regular email box.
Regarding the workflow:
The road is bumpy but everything will be okay. This is a learning
experience for everyone. We are in the deep end of the swimming pool
with no training wheels. It is a big change and there is some shock,
chaos, and arguments. But everything will be okay. We have version
control. If a bad commit is made it can be fixed.
Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I
know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but
that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this
list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page. (Hint:
People who participate often become good candidates to become
committers too!)
The Workflow Work-In-Progress Confluence Page is here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NUTTXTEST/Code+Contribution+Workflow+--+Brennan+Ashton
On purpose I am not writing the whole thing by myself because I do not
want to be pushy. This is a community effort. I already wrote much and
it is in the Confluence page above. My plan is to wait a week or two,
let people work, and let discussions happen.
Let's relax. Let cooler minds prevail. Trust that the Apache Way
works. And everything will be okay.
Nathan