[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?
From: |
Simon Tournier |
Subject: |
Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors? |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:50:52 +0200 |
Hi Liliana,
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 at 19:53, Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler@gmail.com>
wrote:
> For "patch does not apply", the forge solution is typically to send a
> notification to the issuer.
No, that does not match my small experience. Because often the issuer
is gone or not responding. As a reviewer using the forge solution, I am
still able to pull the issuer branch and then resolve the conflicts if
any.
Using “our” workflow, I fail earlier in the process. I am not able to
apply the patches against any branches (pull the PR somehow). An
example:
[bug#62202] [PATCH 0/21] Juliahub import script.
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/871qlq89kz.fsf@ngraves.fr
Even before looking at it, I have to spend some time to find a way to
manually apply the patches. Then, rebasing on the top of master could
lead to conflict but that another story and the same appears whatever
the workflow.
Nicolas did a cool job with this Julia importer, and because of this
first boring task, I am procrastinating and delaying to the eternal
tomorrow the review of the work.
Whatever the complexity of this task, there is no value for the project.
I read Ricardo’s message [1] as: our workflow is far to help us for
having smooth reviews so it’s hard to convince folks already familiar
with other workflows to adopt our. Not saying that these other
workflows are better either.
Cheers,
simon
1: Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?
Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Fri, 08 Sep 2023 22:24:06 +0200
id:87tts44d2y.fsf@elephly.net
87tts44d2y.fsf@elephly.net">https://yhetil.org/guix/87tts44d2y.fsf@elephly.net
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-09
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, (continued)
Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Ricardo Wurmus, 2023/09/08
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Liliana Marie Prikler, 2023/09/08
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Ricardo Wurmus, 2023/09/08
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Liliana Marie Prikler, 2023/09/08
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Ricardo Wurmus, 2023/09/09
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Liliana Marie Prikler, 2023/09/09
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Simon Tournier, 2023/09/11
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Liliana Marie Prikler, 2023/09/11
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?,
Simon Tournier <=
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Maxim Cournoyer, 2023/09/12
- Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Simon Tournier, 2023/09/12
- to PR or not to PR, is /that/ the question?, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2023/09/13
- Re: to PR or not to PR, is /that/ the question?, Simon Tournier, 2023/09/13
- Re: to PR or not to PR, is /that/ the question?, Giovanni Biscuolo, 2023/09/14
- Re: to PR or not to PR, is /that/ the question?, Simon Tournier, 2023/09/14
Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, MSavoritias, 2023/09/17
Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Liliana Marie Prikler, 2023/09/17
Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, Simon Tournier, 2023/09/18
Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?, MSavoritias, 2023/09/18