From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0283A04EF; Mon, 25 May 2020 14:53:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 975381D63A; Mon, 25 May 2020 14:53:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57FB91D61A; Mon, 25 May 2020 14:53:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B1DB40; Mon, 25 May 2020 08:53:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 25 May 2020 08:53:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= Sksw+F26Io5G7OsoCNNio5GIdLrFpqWCMV7gYuHe3nQ=; b=Jh3SucKNIJJt4Kd6 4uCE0bjxy0MPAUcJ0QL76/QeUWOVCcmDMh+ZaQtYhqpsCkf6l4lVMNUDeetn7cwc yr1gYKs7/EShQH+y41qQ+ryW1M+S01cFNBRjxNO4rMjhHgUnd5g2KHXnW2Gd9Ccp sAKBxqNO2puMIbwOZdO5gBiXby+EmcK/9OuUMgTZDQGcVi0jeQuoN+NiCFHcgGx8 0j8XmPh4M5cINtqoLlDbXCqB0iGFJUiu29BpNPzv4SjwZA59/Hm1FZir81YZSfjv mAAnWvWRoEU9tMzTsumnRp+HEoHfWFqM7eUheTMonrpaN84WPtBvOwPLMJkWSdcZ SQ/LPQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Sksw+F26Io5G7OsoCNNio5GIdLrFpqWCMV7gYuHe3 nQ=; b=011wjUCsvr3gArEy43BZGOYW58oYfkC/bPDlyW1AcVK6J84VWxw/ownOL nNrCgdn7/9wGnnXRW/0Z5fAe6LXheVXkGmOchhVjKP0tA+rfvYpabO9qnmZ0sL+e HjD8RLPMuhdtU62GGN24Egi6+k2n3sNDNRMYLGym18e3nJmFIHLsnFyeyrqWflD3 nohQkPn8HbKwfNOd5ErPqiz9D3nl9FdzWREmVObKZGnbwxZfNQ/C/oUx4Q8aEJKT DDDU19Ye5xPo8b2ect/8PBGBniqA7wKvyn/NJk3ZAR1Nmzw5RkckFriHbHpKyTqs cxJMDFJFS/14hhbP/QZcm552TC5cA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedruddvtddgheejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtqhertddttddunecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepheffffejudfhlefhkeevgeevtdeuvdehieeifeejgfdvkedvveek vedtkeevuefgnecuffhomhgrihhnpehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufe egrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghi lhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7B1C03066567; Mon, 25 May 2020 08:53:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Burakov, Anatoly" , Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= , Jerin Jacob Cc: dev@dpdk.org, techboard@dpdk.org, dpdk-dev , "Jim St. Leger" Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 14:53:08 +0200 Message-ID: <2346940.LZvDnYUUCF@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60FEA@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <6d59a42a-915b-47fc-60e6-94a4600d4bff@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Consider improving the DPDK contribution processes X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 25/05/2020 13:58, Jerin Jacob: > 25/05/2020 11:34, Morten Br=F8rup: > > sending patches over an > > email as opposed to a well-integrated web interface workflow is so alien > > to most people that it definitely does discourage new contributions. > > > > I understand the advantages of mailing lists (vendor independence, > > universal compatibility, etc.), but after doing reviews in Github/Gitlab > > for a while (we use those internally), going through DPDK mailing list > > and reviewing code over email fills me with existential dread, as the > > process feels so manual and 19th century to me. >=20 > Agree. I had a difference in opinion when I was not using those tools. > My perspective changed after using Github and Gerrit etc. >=20 > Github pull request and integrated public CI(Travis, Shippable , > codecov) makes collaboration easy. > Currently, in patchwork, we can not assign a patch other than the set > of maintainers. > I think, it would help the review process if the more fine-grained > owner will be responsible for specific > patch set. The more fine-grain is achieved with Cc in mail. But I understand not everybody knows/wants/can configure correctly an email client. Emails are not easy for everybody, I agree. I use GitHub as well, and I really prefer the clarity of the mail threads. GitHub reviews tend to be line-focused, messy and not discussion-friendly. I think contribution quality would be worst if using GitHub. There is a mailing list discussing workflow tooling: https://lore.kernel.org/workflows/