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 7BE6CA04EF; Mon, 25 May 2020 18:04:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 140A41D93E; Mon, 25 May 2020 18:04:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0F031D942 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 18:04:57 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1590422697; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=p580gotlGXnbPzbfxiClkzTQnGsPUaFhZ4GJd6d79a8=; b=Tx3uc0iH8k9jOtnuc5nCNFdMvD30/lpWigTG5K33/i/gHopY4YmvEOiMNX/toVSxl4LMA0 Wlyh5AtNez2twqnKBJfYO8UbLI1mRKWhpugkCK8CpVEQSE8x0E4dHxDOEw9F7YiYwjA3lB 2ATUNAIja5TLMl73LG7qWWJ0cVjDnt8= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-80-DuRA0_lUM7y6OEGmc9bi0A-1; Mon, 25 May 2020 12:04:53 -0400 X-MC-Unique: DuRA0_lUM7y6OEGmc9bi0A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A15D107ACCA; Mon, 25 May 2020 16:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.110.21] (unknown [10.36.110.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A23A5C1BB; Mon, 25 May 2020 16:04:49 +0000 (UTC) To: "Burakov, Anatoly" , Jerin Jacob , Thomas Monjalon Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Morten_Br=c3=b8rup?= , dpdk-dev , techboard@dpdk.org, "Jim St. Leger" References: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60FEA@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <2346940.LZvDnYUUCF@thomas> <354a7cf6-788b-debf-1939-541410a1099b@intel.com> <3551245.iDPhyKTcbK@thomas> <04ce22d8-1e23-5c75-5947-44c8bca040d5@redhat.com> <9de4a537-b5d9-1c3f-90c4-174ca7a1b72a@intel.com> From: Maxime Coquelin Autocrypt: addr=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com; keydata= mQINBFOEQQIBEADjNLYZZqghYuWv1nlLisptPJp+TSxE/KuP7x47e1Gr5/oMDJ1OKNG8rlNg kLgBQUki3voWhUbMb69ybqdMUHOl21DGCj0BTU3lXwapYXOAnsh8q6RRM+deUpasyT+Jvf3a gU35dgZcomRh5HPmKMU4KfeA38cVUebsFec1HuJAWzOb/UdtQkYyZR4rbzw8SbsOemtMtwOx YdXodneQD7KuRU9IhJKiEfipwqk2pufm2VSGl570l5ANyWMA/XADNhcEXhpkZ1Iwj3TWO7XR uH4xfvPl8nBsLo/EbEI7fbuUULcAnHfowQslPUm6/yaGv6cT5160SPXT1t8U9QDO6aTSo59N jH519JS8oeKZB1n1eLDslCfBpIpWkW8ZElGkOGWAN0vmpLfdyiqBNNyS3eGAfMkJ6b1A24un /TKc6j2QxM0QK4yZGfAxDxtvDv9LFXec8ENJYsbiR6WHRHq7wXl/n8guyh5AuBNQ3LIK44x0 KjGXP1FJkUhUuruGyZsMrDLBRHYi+hhDAgRjqHgoXi5XGETA1PAiNBNnQwMf5aubt+mE2Q5r qLNTgwSo2dpTU3+mJ3y3KlsIfoaxYI7XNsPRXGnZi4hbxmeb2NSXgdCXhX3nELUNYm4ArKBP LugOIT/zRwk0H0+RVwL2zHdMO1Tht1UOFGfOZpvuBF60jhMzbQARAQABtCxNYXhpbWUgQ29x dWVsaW4gPG1heGltZS5jb3F1ZWxpbkByZWRoYXQuY29tPokCOAQTAQIAIgUCV3u/5QIbAwYL CQgHAwIGFQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQyjiNKEaHD4ma2g/+P+Hg9WkONPaY1J4AR7Uf kBneosS4NO3CRy0x4WYmUSLYMLx1I3VH6SVjqZ6uBoYy6Fs6TbF6SHNc7QbB6Qjo3neqnQR1 71Ua1MFvIob8vUEl3jAR/+oaE1UJKrxjWztpppQTukIk4oJOmXbL0nj3d8dA2QgHdTyttZ1H xzZJWWz6vqxCrUqHU7RSH9iWg9R2iuTzii4/vk1oi4Qz7y/q8ONOq6ffOy/t5xSZOMtZCspu Mll2Szzpc/trFO0pLH4LZZfz/nXh2uuUbk8qRIJBIjZH3ZQfACffgfNefLe2PxMqJZ8mFJXc RQO0ONZvwoOoHL6CcnFZp2i0P5ddduzwPdGsPq1bnIXnZqJSl3dUfh3xG5ArkliZ/++zGF1O wvpGvpIuOgLqjyCNNRoR7cP7y8F24gWE/HqJBXs1qzdj/5Hr68NVPV1Tu/l2D1KMOcL5sOrz 2jLXauqDWn1Okk9hkXAP7+0Cmi6QwAPuBT3i6t2e8UdtMtCE4sLesWS/XohnSFFscZR6Vaf3 gKdWiJ/fW64L6b9gjkWtHd4jAJBAIAx1JM6xcA1xMbAFsD8gA2oDBWogHGYcScY/4riDNKXi lw92d6IEHnSf6y7KJCKq8F+Jrj2BwRJiFKTJ6ChbOpyyR6nGTckzsLgday2KxBIyuh4w+hMq TGDSp2rmWGJjASq5Ag0EVPSbkwEQAMkaNc084Qvql+XW+wcUIY+Dn9A2D1gMr2BVwdSfVDN7 0ZYxo9PvSkzh6eQmnZNQtl8WSHl3VG3IEDQzsMQ2ftZn2sxjcCadexrQQv3Lu60Tgj7YVYRM H+fLYt9W5YuWduJ+FPLbjIKynBf6JCRMWr75QAOhhhaI0tsie3eDsKQBA0w7WCuPiZiheJaL 4MDe9hcH4rM3ybnRW7K2dLszWNhHVoYSFlZGYh+MGpuODeQKDS035+4H2rEWgg+iaOwqD7bg CQXwTZ1kSrm8NxIRVD3MBtzp9SZdUHLfmBl/tLVwDSZvHZhhvJHC6Lj6VL4jPXF5K2+Nn/Su CQmEBisOmwnXZhhu8ulAZ7S2tcl94DCo60ReheDoPBU8PR2TLg8rS5f9w6mLYarvQWL7cDtT d2eX3Z6TggfNINr/RTFrrAd7NHl5h3OnlXj7PQ1f0kfufduOeCQddJN4gsQfxo/qvWVB7PaE 1WTIggPmWS+Xxijk7xG6x9McTdmGhYaPZBpAxewK8ypl5+yubVsE9yOOhKMVo9DoVCjh5To5 aph7CQWfQsV7cd9PfSJjI2lXI0dhEXhQ7lRCFpf3V3mD6CyrhpcJpV6XVGjxJvGUale7+IOp sQIbPKUHpB2F+ZUPWds9yyVxGwDxD8WLqKKy0WLIjkkSsOb9UBNzgRyzrEC9lgQ/ABEBAAGJ Ah8EGAECAAkFAlT0m5MCGwwACgkQyjiNKEaHD4nU8hAAtt0xFJAy0sOWqSmyxTc7FUcX+pbD KVyPlpl6urKKMk1XtVMUPuae/+UwvIt0urk1mXi6DnrAN50TmQqvdjcPTQ6uoZ8zjgGeASZg jj0/bJGhgUr9U7oG7Hh2F8vzpOqZrdd65MRkxmc7bWj1k81tOU2woR/Gy8xLzi0k0KUa8ueB iYOcZcIGTcs9CssVwQjYaXRoeT65LJnTxYZif2pfNxfINFzCGw42s3EtZFteczClKcVSJ1+L +QUY/J24x0/ocQX/M1PwtZbB4c/2Pg/t5FS+s6UB1Ce08xsJDcwyOPIH6O3tccZuriHgvqKP yKz/Ble76+NFlTK1mpUlfM7PVhD5XzrDUEHWRTeTJSvJ8TIPL4uyfzhjHhlkCU0mw7Pscyxn DE8G0UYMEaNgaZap8dcGMYH/96EfE5s/nTX0M6MXV0yots7U2BDb4soLCxLOJz4tAFDtNFtA wLBhXRSvWhdBJZiig/9CG3dXmKfi2H+wdUCSvEFHRpgo7GK8/Kh3vGhgKmnnxhl8ACBaGy9n fxjSxjSO6rj4/MeenmlJw1yebzkX8ZmaSi8BHe+n6jTGEFNrbiOdWpJgc5yHIZZnwXaW54QT UhhSjDL1rV2B4F28w30jYmlRmm2RdN7iCZfbyP3dvFQTzQ4ySquuPkIGcOOHrvZzxbRjzMx1 Mwqu3GQ= Message-ID: <6512da71-09a0-3357-27b1-58939597bcf1@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 18:04:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9de4a537-b5d9-1c3f-90c4-174ca7a1b72a@intel.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] 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" On 5/25/20 5:59 PM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > On 25-May-20 4:52 PM, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >> >> >> On 5/25/20 5:35 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote: >>> On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 8:52 PM Thomas Monjalon >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> 25/05/2020 16:28, Burakov, Anatoly: >>>>> On 25-May-20 1:53 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>> 25/05/2020 13:58, Jerin Jacob: >>>>>>> 25/05/2020 11:34, Morten Brørup: >>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Agree. I had a difference in opinion when I was not using those >>>>>>> tools. >>>>>>> My perspective changed after using Github and Gerrit etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> I have more experience with Gitlab than Github, but i really don't see >>>>> it that way. >>>>> >>>>> For one, reviewing in Gitlab makes it easier to see context in which >>>>> changes appear. I mean, obviously, you can download the patch, >>>>> apply it, >>>>> and then do whatever you want with it in your editor/IDE, but it's >>>>> just >>>>> so much faster to do it right in the browser. Reviewing things with >>>>> proper syntax highlighting and side-by-side diff with an option to see >>>>> more context really makes a huge difference and is that much faster. >>>> >>>> OK >>>> >>>> >>>>> I would also vehemently disagree with the "clarity" argument. There is >>>>> enforced minimum standard of clarity of discussion in a tool such as >>>>> Gitlab. I'm sure you noticed that some people top-post, some >>>>> bottom-post. Some will remove extraneous lines of patches while some >>>>> will leave on comment in a 10K line patch and leave the rest as is, in >>>>> quotes. Some people do weird quoting where they don't actually >>>>> quote but >>>>> just copy text verbatim, making it hard to determine where the quote >>>>> starts. If the thread is long enough, you'd see the same text quoted >>>>> over and over and over. All of that is not a problem within a single >>>>> patch email, but it adds up to lots of wasted time on all sides. >>>> >>>> Yes >>>> >>>> My concern about clarity is the history of the discussion. >>>> When we post a new versions in GitHub, it's very hard to keep track >>>> of the history. >>>> As a maintainer, I need to see the history to understand what happened, >>>> what we are waiting for, and what should be merged. >>> >>> IMO, The complete history is available per pull request URL. >>> I think, Github also email notification mechanism those to prefer to see >>> comments in the email too. >>> >>> In addition to that, Bugzilla, patchwork, CI stuff all integrated into >>> one place. >>> I am quite impressed with vscode community collaboration. >>> https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/pulls >> >> Out of curiosity, just checked the git history and I'm not that >> impressed. For example last commit on the master branch: >> >> https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/commit/2a4cecf3f2f72346d06990feeb7446b3915d6148 >> >> >> Commit title: " Fix #98530 " >> Commit message empty, no explanation on what the patch is doing. >> >> Then, let's check the the issue it is pointed to: >> https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/98530 >> >> Issue is created 15 minutes before the patch is being merged. All that >> done by the same contributor, without any review. >> > > Just because they do it wrong doesn't mean we can't do it right :) This > says more about Microsoft's lack of process around VSCode than it does > about Github the tool. > True. I was just pointing out that is not the kind of process I would personally want to adopt.