In data domenica 23 agosto 2020 14:59:20 CEST, Jonas Smedegaard ha scritto:
> Quoting Pino Toscano (2020-08-23 14:04:53)
> > In data domenica 23 agosto 2020 13:52:00 CEST, Jonas Smedegaard ha scritto:
> > > Quoting Pino Toscano (2020-08-23 11:57:16)
> > > > In data domenica 23 agosto 2020 11:47:47 CEST, Jonas Smedegaard ha scritto:
> > > > > Jonas Smedegaard commented:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for your proposed change.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please, however, instead contribute to the related Debian bugreport archived at https://bugs.debian.org/968555 and accessible by posting email to <mailto:968555@bugs.debian.org>.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry for the confusion and inconvenience: Even though this Gitlab service at salsa.debian.org offers an issue tracker, Debian uses a different email-based issue tracker.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will now close this issue _without_ solving it, and hope you will join the conversation at bug#968555
> > > >
> > > > Err, sorry, but this is not true. There were other MRs in the past for
> > > > ffmpeg, and they were accepted/merged by other ffmpeg uploaders.
> > > > Also, I see you disabled MRs altogether, which makes even past MRs not
> > > > reacheable anymore, which is bad.
> > > >
> > > > Please reconsider this, Jonas.
> > >
> > > It is true that Debian uses debbugs as issue tracker.
> >
> > This does not imply anything about other solutions.
> >
> > > You are free to insist that it is possible to do other things than what
> > > I am pointing out as a recommended way forward. Maybe someone find your
> > > different approach great and best and true.
> >
> > Jonas, I honestly do not understand the point you are trying to make
> > here. There are two problems in what you did, let me explain them
> > further more:
> >
> > Problem #1: sudden rejection of merge requests.
> > They were accepted in the past, mostly by James Cowgill:
> > https://salsa.debian.org/multimedia-team/ffmpeg/-/commit/6b1b5c4cccd2d98d4c0177e840a3f2fff27c9d9a
> > https://salsa.debian.org/multimedia-team/ffmpeg/-/commit/d0ecb3e1fac0f656253f1d18a007dd63f76daaf6
> > https://salsa.debian.org/multimedia-team/ffmpeg/-/commit/2158164c70223f7881136200cd5427e65a6af66b
> > Considering my MR was !5, this makes 3 out of 4 previous MRs reviewed
> > and accepted by ffmpeg maintainers (assuming you didn't kick James out
> > in the meanwhile, of course).
> > For a potential contributor, looking at a packaging repository and
> > noticing that MRs are accepted encourages sending changes as MRs;
> > suddently changing this by another maintainer gives a *bad* message,
> > i.e. that there is no agreement by maintainers, and this kind of
> > contributions is at the whim of the "active maintainer of the week".
>
> For the record, I received this message from the salsa issue tracker:
>
> > @js can you please take a look at this before your next upload?
> > Thanks!
>
> You asked *me* specifically to merge, not the team generally.
I asked you specifically because I saw you uploaded recently, that's
it. Other than poking all the people that uploaded ffmpeg in the last,
say, 1 or 2 years, I don't see a way to "address a team".
> There nothing "sudden" about me rejecing MRs on salsa.
The thing is: closing the MRs for the repository is not only for *you*
but affects anyone else working on ffmpeg. James Cowgill merged them
in the past, now it is not possible even if he wanted them.
> Maybe you would have had a worse experience: no response, and an MR
> being ignored by the team. And other newcomers would have a bad
> experience as well: lack of chatter in the issue tracker and a stale
> unprocessed MR...
IMHO answering me "sorry, I don't look at MRs myself, can you please
ask James or $other person? thanks!" would have been a way more fair
answer that matches what you just wrote me above.
Instead, you answer ("mass MR close" + "disable MR") gives the feeling
that it is a team decision, not a your own personal one.
> Same speculation for maintenance of ffmpeg in general: Maybe it would
> have been greater maintained if I had not helped. I mean, you consider
> me merely the "active maintainer of the week", right?
Sorry about that sentence, especially since the message was definitely
not this. What I wanted to say is that I see different people doing
uploads on ffmpeg: in the last few months it is you, before it was
James Cowgill, Sebastian Ramacher, and even earlier Andreas Cadhalpun
too. So I genuinely don't know whether it will be you uploading ffmpeg,
say, in a month, or it will be somebody else.
Again, apologies for the wrong tone implied.
> It was exactly because I was concerned about the impression by newcomers
> that I did not ignore your direct message, but spent time explaining
> where to more appropriately report the issue instead, and then spent
> time disabling the interface to avoid others being mislead by the
> currently unused issue tracking and git processing tools.
I explained why disabling the interface is actually not a great idea.
> > Problem #2: hiding of past MR information
> > Since you disabled the MRs in the salsa repository, then all the past
> > ones cannot be seen anymore. I think all the discussions/etc are still
> > in the gitlab database, but practically speaking all the data is *lost*
> > for normal users (including you and me). This is the equivalent of
> > making bugs in the BTS no more accessible, not even as archived.
>
> [...]
>
> If you are aware of some way to do that, please do tell.
Maybe add a text on the description of the repository that says
something like "MERGE REQUESTS WILL MOSTLY BE IGNORED"? But ...
> Because my
> _main_ objective was to communicate the whim of this weeks developer
> over the whim of last weeks developer,
... please note what I wrote earlier as problem #1: since this is a
team-maintained package, my expectation is that all the people in the
team (hopefully) are more or less on the same page, or at least not in
conflicting views. Having changes in the workflow like
- "BTS only"
- then "I will look at MRs"
- then "no, BTS only"
- then "MRs are preferred"
and so on it not helpful for anyone else outside the team, because
there is no clear direction on what the team prefers/recommends/wants
as a way to get contributions.
> > Again, Jonas, please reconsider what you did. This has nothing to do
> > with my own stupid patch, but in general with the way you are showing
> > "collaboration".
>
> Seems you confuse "collaboration" and "embrasing salsa as issue tracker
> and patch processor".
No, I don't.
--
Pino ToscanoAttachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.