From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C21CBE72 for ; Wed, 6 May 2015 12:38:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hmsreliant.think-freely.org ([2001:470:8:a08:7aac:c0ff:fec2:933b] helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1YpwiE-0001I5-BJ; Wed, 06 May 2015 06:38:00 -0400 Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 06:37:52 -0400 From: Neil Horman To: Simon =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E5gstr=F6m?= Message-ID: <20150506103752.GB4947@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <20150501164512.GB27756@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20150501173108.GA24714@mhcomputing.net> <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E602860466B524@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20150504174857.GA27496@mhcomputing.net> <924D0FD1-4A1F-4C3E-929C-38C29AED61D7@netgate.com> <20150505135542.GB27259@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <0CA4031C-561F-4BB9-8B14-674D6D99EE6E@intel.com> <5549CCEC.8090606@redhat.com> <5549D10C.7010300@netinsight.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <5549D10C.7010300@netinsight.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--) X-Spam-Status: No Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] GitHub sandbox for the DPDK community X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 10:38:02 -0000 On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 10:30:04AM +0200, Simon Kågström wrote: > On 2015-05-06 10:12, Panu Matilainen wrote: > > On 05/05/2015 07:43 PM, Wiles, Keith wrote: > > > >> GitHub offers a different set of processes and > >> tools, which we do not have to create. Moving to GitHub is a change > >> for the community and I feel a good change for the better. > > > > Like quite a few others in this thread, I dont care if the git repo > > moved to the end of internet as long as email continues to be a > > first-class means for patch submissions, reviews and other > > communication. It doesn't have to be the only way as clearly many people > > prefer otherwise. > > Perhaps something like pull-request-mailer could be used to tend to both > camps? I.e., sending out github pull requests to the mailing list for > review: > > https://github.com/google/pull-request-mailer > FWIW, I'm the irqbalance maintainer, and I use github for that project, because its super low volume at this point (i.e. its mature, and doesn't really need a mailing list). That said, I am investigating the above mail bridge utility for that project and will let you all know the results. Neil > Anyway, for me personally (as a DPDK outsider), what I feel would be the > main improvement with using github would be that they have a very > well-integrated bug reporting system that keeps track of e.g., the > commit that fixes the bug etc. > > I recently submitted a build issue to the mailing list, which Olivier > Matz promptly fixed with a patch (but which haven't been merged as far > as I can tell). In the gihub workflow, I'd submitted a bug report > ("Issue #13" for example), Olivier would have fixed this through a > merge-request ("Issue #13: scripts: fix relpath.sh output when build dir > is a symlink") and I'd acked that fix in the bug report. When the merge > request was merged to the git repo, the bug report would be closed. > > > I'm also interested in the architecture discussions etc (or the github > debate!) on the list, but I really don't read patches sent to the list. > > > So if I had a vote (which I shouldn't have :-)), I'd vote for a gradual > move to github and a mailing list split. > > // Simon >