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 793CBA04EF; Mon, 25 May 2020 19:50:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEED81D99D; Mon, 25 May 2020 19:50:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A431D995; Mon, 25 May 2020 19:50:15 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: 2GcEA/GF59mq78v4jNzP6k6D4eaWV6JdqVRcxcjrkcElkjbxIQw6KqrWpaJENuLg7G5kPiwwxB BffX3xrk+2Nw== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 May 2020 10:50:14 -0700 IronPort-SDR: xmNgRCzeYb0ZH1v80bBeKRTV6jsaP1paGul+Dn/MZW7nm23C2q1Sa1TehOHCFmUkZVDv6kl/x3 cjRv8yP374lA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,434,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="256266825" Received: from orsmsx103.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.225.130]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 May 2020 10:50:14 -0700 Received: from orsmsx157.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.23) by ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.225.130) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Mon, 25 May 2020 10:50:13 -0700 Received: from ORSEDG001.ED.cps.intel.com (10.7.248.4) by ORSMSX157.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Mon, 25 May 2020 10:50:13 -0700 Received: from NAM12-MW2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.66.40) by edgegateway.intel.com (134.134.137.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Mon, 25 May 2020 10:50:13 -0700 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=UX1/SUev29+YIO/PfKgKqKDobcvXrT7M509FikDlbK6UhCNrSGUuqTJCMCpmwyyXYSZcmCSb0poFvo+ytemrj0U9sGLWGlG5SBmGqj3tZ5Gl5LkG5iYQGU0UDqukJpoW9lb7grFgn5r1zrR1nuh4YFjeWyEZ7vbI//9R2nyGXxPhdlbAgedZh/qjXc8YfxzHt3BTj3zQHhDsQHn/SoF0ooAPMEjVxd9eTbu8pPaZPufGoxUrJlD07h6+eC1KVKetOi37yVuoSs1XF826DA/i3x8r1tdi+MTiFeR4e0N4z4XaSSWNEYrgaf6tFQ6AN0ICf+a/uoND00RpsWyfWApz3w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7NYMMArpeJPlZTmEwEc43ZT1z1Fc1lbdDUwH0BQBjrY=; b=oVGlPigvp0xtX7qvPwXijKUaZYPy0t1TK14DddXu1UbLTAhHfVSBQkYmV9/F/tzo4QpEZFWTlUgl/7MHFE8zEYHadkkzKhLupO6b8DH55lGI07vmUqMMDHIrDj1mwXYW5R5DNJdE25sTebZAouDUENKKaPlvOZqEHUCACEdTwJ+fKRFSfA4iu63WO0MOkir+J3ME7IsVKqL53oO4Cr/EPclZecRv1aaXOciGatrVXV6/PTAH5b6EVD4qac2ta1rADTw2kDUtnKbM5BIevhjPZLBDVACfrOCC0vQjNaNMKWtGS2gfdmGXgGwKni6XHIVqQGqI83E9F0dgRYkVG6dzzw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=intel.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-intel-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=7NYMMArpeJPlZTmEwEc43ZT1z1Fc1lbdDUwH0BQBjrY=; b=gz3I44nsgwlha3oZ/FFG3eM3wWey6fwjIXO4VV+23YF/roZ+xzYIfIqRzZ9dNMQUYMlnXAjCHBL4MQr6+drcUYiVVKM1VVQ3f7LzKhan0dK5dObXcmXt4ya+CudfQuLOru7yt9ZqdPmVBTdoqWFAeEdA7iILJMNM5IlmIpJ25cI= Received: from DM6PR11MB4593.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:2a3::8) by DM6PR11MB3321.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:8::26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3021.26; Mon, 25 May 2020 17:50:12 +0000 Received: from DM6PR11MB4593.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::acee:4fa2:2a9e:7cd6]) by DM6PR11MB4593.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::acee:4fa2:2a9e:7cd6%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3021.029; Mon, 25 May 2020 17:50:12 +0000 From: "Wiles, Keith" To: Thomas Monjalon CC: Jerin Jacob , "Burakov, Anatoly" , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= , Maxime Coquelin , dpdk-dev , "techboard@dpdk.org" , "St Leger, Jim" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] Consider improving the DPDK contribution processes Thread-Index: AQHWMrp+i00XkJKxV06al9JjuTrDV6i5FGqA Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 17:50:12 +0000 Message-ID: <3134350D-4520-49AF-8C1A-F3924527BF95@intel.com> References: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35C60FEA@smartserver.smartshare.dk> <11959277.FkLDZFFinP@thomas> <6E257791-337C-495A-9F23-0F385E5B075F@intel.com> <8739815.gXEhDU8P3t@thomas> In-Reply-To: <8739815.gXEhDU8P3t@thomas> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: monjalon.net; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;monjalon.net; dmarc=none action=none header.from=intel.com; x-originating-ip: [134.134.136.193] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9f705bae-193a-47d4-46f0-08d800d4131f x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR11MB3321: x-ld-processed: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d,ExtAddr x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508; x-forefront-prvs: 0414DF926F x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: m+PcP91kJbRvEcrSSHklD6Q9L1SS71qNTREJT8T678QqrFSrC4SmbYCV2NT5aWDChbrGME9FQPIhWqt0s96e2wEK7fp+XEfFuMJAcfafvbNeqoISUUiUGYhLuZbzrlHqd5MPF15pItwNSqcffmoia70O0KlKIkHCnKbzwySFZuYe91bRFQY4mvLy7NT5LQamyH9nwuvCyttbFaEfZj8KaQ2a5CBXXwgQwfBiIVxwQcHLtlMnFiV1Wcinm9jSJfFO4FynwVrSlni4v70xeTV6O7p6DIIdvOARNYUBIZ4SRF/uAcyLb2YcSEMwAWQ1RRZPvYK6hsbnPNDqaxoPuc0Wi81Ao2TnnVqGcLpXQJySzVwl2KKHN8+h196CiTCR0HyLe5kMRRrOQHN6LEOT369QhA== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DM6PR11MB4593.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(346002)(366004)(136003)(376002)(396003)(39860400002)(53546011)(6506007)(36756003)(186003)(26005)(107886003)(33656002)(66446008)(2906002)(76116006)(91956017)(6486002)(66476007)(66556008)(64756008)(71200400001)(66946007)(8936002)(8676002)(966005)(2616005)(6512007)(6916009)(316002)(86362001)(4326008)(54906003)(45080400002)(5660300002)(478600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: <4B12EA9AB013C949BC1925D0F26598B6@namprd11.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9f705bae-193a-47d4-46f0-08d800d4131f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 May 2020 17:50:12.5793 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: P99iHOejyKMh8t3Qn9Y6MSsjNjqaSqasOAE5B6dsF57yjvOwmpMREcKCwOYZXQ+3ihvlMfzhsabpccUcvdlYoA== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB3321 X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com 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 May 25, 2020, at 12:32 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote= : >=20 > 25/05/2020 18:57, Wiles, Keith: >> On May 25, 2020, at 11:28 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrot= e: >>> 25/05/2020 18:09, Burakov, Anatoly: >>>> On 25-May-20 5:04 PM, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >>>>> 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 May 25, 2020 Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>>>>> My concern about clarity is the history of the discussion. >>>>>>>>> When we post a new versions in GitHub, it's very hard to keep tra= ck >>>>>>>>> of the history. >>>>>>>>> As a maintainer, I need to see the history to understand what hap= pened, >>>>>>>>> what we are waiting for, and what should be merged. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Out of curiosity, just checked the git history and I'm not that >>>>>>> impressed. For example last commit on the master branch: >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/commit/2a4cecf3f2f72346d06990fe= eb7446b3915d6148 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Commit title: " Fix #98530 " >>>>>>> Commit message empty, no explanation on what the patch is doing. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Then, let's check the the issue it is pointed to: >>>>>>> https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/98530 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Issue is created 15 minutes before the patch is being merged. All t= hat >>>>>>> done by the same contributor, without any review. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Just because they do it wrong doesn't mean we can't do it right :) T= his >>>>>> says more about Microsoft's lack of process around VSCode than it do= es >>>>>> about Github the tool. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> True. I was just pointing out that is not the kind of process I would >>>>> personally want to adopt. >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> You won't find disagreement here, but this "process" is not due to the= =20 >>>> tool. You can just as well allow Thomas to merge stuff without any=20 >>>> review because he has commit rights, no Github needed - and you would = be=20 >>>> faced with the same problem. >>>>=20 >>>> So, i don't think Jerin was suggesting that we degrade our merge/commi= t=20 >>>> rules. Rather, the point was that (whatever you think of VSCode's=20 >>>> review/merge process) there are a lot of pull requests and there is=20 >>>> healthy community collaboration. I'm not saying we don't have that, >>>=20 >>> Yes, recent survey said the process was fine: >>> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/announce/2019-June/000268.html >>=20 >> IMO the survey is not a great tool for these types of things. The tech b= oard and others that fully understand the process should decide. From my ex= perience using Github or Gitlab is much easy and a single tool to submit pa= tches to a project. Anatoly and others stated it very well and we should co= nvert IMO, as I have always stated in the past. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> obviously, but i have a suspicion that we'll get more of it if we lowe= r=20 >>>> the barrier for entry (not the barrier for merge!). I think there is a= =20 >>>> way to lower the secondary skill level needed to contribute to DPDK=20 >>>> without lowering coding/merge standards with it. >>>=20 >>> About the barrier for entry, maybe it is not obvious because I don't >>> communicate a lot about it, but please be aware that I (and other >>> maintainers I think) are doing a lot of changes in newcomer patches >>> to avoid asking them knowing the whole process from the beginning. >>> Then frequent contributors get educated on the way. >>>=20 >>> I think the only real barrier we have is to sign the patch >>> with a real name and send an email to right list. >>> The ask for SoB real name is probably what started this thread >>> in Morten's mind. And the SoB requirement will *never* change. >>=20 >> Would it not free up your time and energies by have the tools >> do most of the work. then you can focus on what matters the patch >> and developing more features? >=20 > No, GitHub is not helping to track root cause and define what should be b= ackported. > It does not help to track Coverity issues. > It does not add Acks automatically (but patchwork does). > It does not send a notification when enough review is done (judgement nee= ded here). > It does not split patches when different bugs are fixed. > etc... Thanks for reading my emails and I am trying to help DPDK as a whole. All of these seem to be supported by GitHub or GitLab in one way or another= , but other more versed in these tools can correct me. - We use Coverity and other tools attached to GitLab and they seem to be do= ing the job. I agree we will always find issues and these tools are not a c= omplete answer and no tool is today. - Acks can be done via the merge rules (at least in GitLab FWIW not used Gi= tHub much). - cherry-picking a merge request into multiple commit or different merge re= quest appear to be supported. - Notifications are part of the process with merge rules if I understand yo= ur comment. We need to drag DPDK kicking and screaming into the year 2020 :-) >=20 > But yes GitHub provides a beautiful interface, > and can help with reviews (even if not my taste). >=20 > One more thing I experience sometimes, GitHub requires only one account > for all hosted projects, so it helps leaving quick comments in projects > we are not familiar with. >=20 >=20 >> There is a reasons millions of developer use one of these two tools, ins= tead of emailing patch around. We are a fairly small project compared to Li= nux Kernel and we are not developing code for the Linux kernel. Some of the= process like coding standard is great, but the rest is just legacy IMO and= not required to get the job done. Having tools to keep track of the minuti= a should free up more of your time for the real development. >>=20 >> Yes, it will be a learning curve for some and nailing down the process o= r rules for merge requests needs to be done. >>=20 >> All in all it will be a huge improvement for contributors.