[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters |
Date: |
Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:39:37 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 11:16:55AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Too hard for people with less than 5 hours of training to
> > determine.
>
> I am not sure I understand that rationale.
>
> git log origin
>
> Is it there or not? Can you think of a _simpler_ test that works for
> figuring out something is in _staging_?
David,
I cannot teach somebody to use git in less than 5 hours. All the
evidence from the past years of lilypond development suggests that
we cannot teach people to use git in less than 5 hours.
The idea behind the bug squad is that unskilled users -- no git,
no linux, no programming experience -- can help out with a minimal
time investment (20 minutes a week). We require that they are
able to read+write emails in English, and use a web2.0 facebook on
par with the difficulty of using facebook. That's it. There's
also about 10 pages in the CG they need to read. If training
takes more than, oh, say 3 sessions (i.e. 60 minutes total), then
most potential volunteers will give up. Less than 50% of bug
squad volunteers are active after 4 weeks of initially
volunteering. We should not be making it harder to do the bug
squad duties.
Now, maybe the best answer is "bug squad: don't try to verify
'patch' issues, leave all those for an experienced developer to
examine". But I don't see the point of that. It's pretty rare of
us to lose patches -- say, maybe 2% of patches get lost? And that
was before all the Patchy stuff. Having a simple check of "is it
in webgit or not" will probably catch 90-95% of the 2% of patches
that would have gotten lost.
> Note that it means _nothing_ at all if Savannah knows about the commit
> id. There are a number of possible reasons for that (for example, it
> knows about something I accidentally pushed then removed again, and it
> knows about everything pushed to private branches).
That's a good point; I didn't realize about private branches.
Still, I think that to some extent this is a solution looking for
a problem. (or maybe "a problem looking for a problem"?)
How much grief could we have avoided if we had a developer
checking for patches in the git log for master? I can't think of
any grief this would have avoided.
Frankly, I don't think it would be horrible if nobody even _tried_
to verify patches and just automatically marked them as verified.
But if people want to do a bit more than that, I think that
checking for the commit in savannah is a decent trade-off.
Cheers,
- Graham
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, (continued)
Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, lilypond, 2011/11/27
- Message not available
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, lilypond, 2011/11/28
- Message not available
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, lilypond, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, David Kastrup, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, Graham Percival, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, David Kastrup, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters,
Graham Percival <=
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in a Scheme expression can't include special characters, David Kastrup, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in aScheme expression can't include special characters, Phil Holmes, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in aScheme expression can't include special characters, Colin Campbell, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in aScheme expression can't include special characters, David Kastrup, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded in aScheme expression can't include special characters, Graham Percival, 2011/11/28
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded inaScheme expression can't include special characters, Phil Holmes, 2011/11/29
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded inaScheme expression can't include special characters, Carl Sorensen, 2011/11/29
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embedded inaScheme expression can't include special characters, Graham Percival, 2011/11/29
- Re: Issue 1356 in lilypond: LilyPond-style comments embeddedinaScheme expression can't include special characters, Phil Holmes, 2011/11/30