On 9/29/2021 12:38 PM, Ralph Boehme wrote:
Am 29.09.21 um 17:42 schrieb Jeremy Allison:
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:28:09AM -0400, Tom Talpey wrote:
I completely agree that email is inefficient, but git is a terrible
way to have a discussion. We should attempt to be sure we have
those, and that everybody has a chance to see the proposals without
having to go to the web five times a day.
Please take this as a request for regular git-send-email updates to
this list, so I can see them if I'm not online. Maybe add a boilerplate
line to direct to the git repo webui. I'm sure a few others will
appreciate it too.
Samba does well with the web-based discussion mechanism
around merge-requests (MR's) in gitlab. I assume github
has something similar.
Maybe send the initial patch to the list with a link
to the github MR so people interested in reviewing/discussing
can follow along there ?
well, if I could have it the way I wanted, then this would be it. But I
understand that adopting new workflows is not something I can impose --
at least not without paying for an insane amount of Lakritz-Gitarren
that I tend to use to bribe metze into doing something I want him to do. :)
I'm in for github if you send me some too!
https://www.gutschmecker.com/produkt/haevy-metal-salzige-gitarren-10-x-150-g-tuete/
The problem is not so much doing the *review* on patches sent to the
list. While Samba has moved away from doing review on patch emails, it
can certainly be done.
Clearly, this effort bridges the Linux and Samba processes. We can
definitely try. I guess I'm going to take some convincing.
Tom.
The point is, once you go beyond "review" by taking someone else's
patchset, modifying it deeply, reordering patches, adding patches,
rewriting patches, dropping patches and so on, that's when the
patchset-as-email workflow explodes and coordination via git is needed.
Once such a collaboratively worked on patchset stabilizes, it can of
course again go to the mailing list.
-slow
