Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
- Bert -
On Monday 24 Aug 2009 3:37:13 am Bert Freudenberg wrote:
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing
I like the commit messages with its diff style patches. it is like any other poster to this list. But I would hate to handle 100 commit messages in a single day. As long as the number of postings is kept below a threshold (say 4) a day, it will serve a good purpose.
Is it possible to throttle the rate of posts? Perhaps batch it into daily digest if it starts exceeding this threshold?
Subbu
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.dewrote:
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
Yea, okay.
If the traffic becomes too high, I'm sure somebody will find a way to throttle it or manage it.
Gulik.
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Bert Freudenbergbert@freudenbergs.de wrote:
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
before anything else: I like the fine-grained commit messages *very* much as they make immediately apparent what has been done, by whom, and where it has been uploaded.
As for the target mailing list, squeak-dev has obviously moved away from being solely about developing *Squeak*. The commit mails kind of push the fact that squeak-dev, after all, *is* a developers' list, in people's faces. Asking all users not interested in Squeak *development* to go and join another list may be asking too much; it has a distinct smell of "go away if you're not interested in this". (I'm deliberately exaggerating a bit here.)
As for developers, some of them may rather like to inform themselves about commits in a batch-oriented way; this has been asked for already. A dedicated commit mailing list can be configured to send single e-mails or batches by each subscriber.
In a nutshell, I'd opt for a commit mailing list.
Best,
Michael
On 24.08.2009, at 10:09, Michael Haupt wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Bert Freudenberg<bert@freudenbergs.de
wrote: No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
before anything else: I like the fine-grained commit messages *very* much as they make immediately apparent what has been done, by whom, and where it has been uploaded.
As for the target mailing list, squeak-dev has obviously moved away from being solely about developing *Squeak*. The commit mails kind of push the fact that squeak-dev, after all, *is* a developers' list, in people's faces. Asking all users not interested in Squeak *development* to go and join another list may be asking too much; it has a distinct smell of "go away if you're not interested in this". (I'm deliberately exaggerating a bit here.)
As for developers, some of them may rather like to inform themselves about commits in a batch-oriented way; this has been asked for already. A dedicated commit mailing list can be configured to send single e-mails or batches by each subscriber.
In a nutshell, I'd opt for a commit mailing list.
How about this -
PROPOSAL: we make the detailed commit notices go to a separate list as soon as someone has added a "digest" feature. This would send a daily or weekly summary to squeak-dev, containing just the commit summary a link to the detailed diffs. Bonus points for listing affected classes.
Btw, the code is at http://squeaksource.com/ss.html
- Bert -
On 24-Aug-09, at 1:27 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
PROPOSAL: we make the detailed commit notices go to a separate list as soon as someone has added a "digest" feature. This would send a daily or weekly summary to squeak-dev, containing just the commit summary a link to the detailed diffs. Bonus points for listing affected classes.
-1.
There are two problems with this. First, batching the commit messages lengthens the feedback loop that the messages create. If there's a message for every commit, the message can be sent right after the commit is made. The community can react and provide feedback to the developer immediately. If that feedback days or even just a few hours, it's too late to be useful. The developer has moved on mentally, and even if he can remember exactly what he did and why, it's no longer fresh in his mind.
Second, the worry that individual messages demand too much attention is certainly legitimate. But by batching the messages into a digest we actually make it harder to manage those demands for attention. Most email clients offer filtering systems that allow messages to be processed automatically; with automatically generated message like these message filters are very effective. Even if you process the messages manually, it's easy to scan the subject lines and read only those messages that are interesting to you. But a daily or weekly digest is much more difficult to process automatically. It's also harder to process manually - you have to not only scan for the packages you're interested in, but skip over the details of the commits that are not interesting.
In short, daily or weekly digests are great if you want to ignore the messages entirely, but not so useful if you want to actually read and respond to them.
Colin
Hello —, Am 2009-08-24 um 10:27 schrieb Bert Freudenberg: […]
PROPOSAL: we make the detailed commit notices go to a separate list as soon as someone has added a "digest" feature. This would send a daily or weekly summary to squeak-dev, containing just the commit summary a link to the detailed diffs. Bonus points for listing affected classes.
In fact, mailman (wich is aparently powering this list) is capable of creating daily digests. That said, having this list subscribing to a distinct commit-mailing- list, is would be possible to have squeak-dev receiving only the digest whilst have all other subscribers receive the standard form. A side effect would be that the digest would already contain all discussion going on the commit-list. This would avoid the opt-out-scenario described by Michael. In fact, it would be opt-in (to the commit list) for everyone interested in very recent commit messages and disscussion of them.
So Long, -Tobias
On 24.08.2009, at 13:48, Tobias Pape wrote:
Hello —, Am 2009-08-24 um 10:27 schrieb Bert Freudenberg: […]
PROPOSAL: we make the detailed commit notices go to a separate list as soon as someone has added a "digest" feature. This would send a daily or weekly summary to squeak-dev, containing just the commit summary a link to the detailed diffs. Bonus points for listing affected classes.
In fact, mailman (wich is aparently powering this list) is capable of creating daily digests. That said, having this list subscribing to a distinct commit-mailing- list, is would be possible to have squeak-dev receiving only the digest whilst have all other subscribers receive the standard form.
That's a nice low-tech idea, but by far not as useful as a customized digest.
It should be as concise as possible while still providing enough information to follow what's going on (my suggestion was to only have the commit summary, a list of affected classes, plus a link to the full commit that shows the diff). The format could be similar to the update log.
Making the development process transparent is way more important than the convenience of those who don't care about it. At least so much we learned. I agree with Collin that individual commit notes on squeak- dev do not appear to be a real problem for now (how hard is it to press delete?). But a nicely generated digest that balances convenience with utility would be an acceptable compromise.
A side effect would be that the digest would already contain all discussion going on the commit-list. This would avoid the opt-out-scenario described by Michael. In fact, it would be opt-in (to the commit list) for everyone interested in very recent commit messages and disscussion of them.
No. The commit list would only allow posting from the source server, and have reply-to set to squeak-dev. Discussion needs to take place here.
- Bert -
-1
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 10:27 +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 24.08.2009, at 10:09, Michael Haupt wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Bert Freudenberg<bert@freudenbergs.de
wrote: No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
before anything else: I like the fine-grained commit messages *very* much as they make immediately apparent what has been done, by whom, and where it has been uploaded.
As for the target mailing list, squeak-dev has obviously moved away from being solely about developing *Squeak*. The commit mails kind of push the fact that squeak-dev, after all, *is* a developers' list, in people's faces. Asking all users not interested in Squeak *development* to go and join another list may be asking too much; it has a distinct smell of "go away if you're not interested in this". (I'm deliberately exaggerating a bit here.)
As for developers, some of them may rather like to inform themselves about commits in a batch-oriented way; this has been asked for already. A dedicated commit mailing list can be configured to send single e-mails or batches by each subscriber.
In a nutshell, I'd opt for a commit mailing list.
How about this -
PROPOSAL: we make the detailed commit notices go to a separate list as soon as someone has added a "digest" feature. This would send a daily or weekly summary to squeak-dev, containing just the commit summary a link to the detailed diffs. Bonus points for listing affected classes.
Btw, the code is at http://squeaksource.com/ss.html
- Bert -
I much much prefer your earlier suggestion.
Ken
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
Hah, yes indeed :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
Well, while they are a bit noisy, I don't mind them, and they _do_ provide visibility into the process. I can't say I read all of them, but I like having the option of just skimming diffs if I feel the urge.
Other mailing lists do the same: slime-devel have a "Daily Commit Log" message. That might be an option if people find the messages TOO noisy: bundle the commits into a single message per day. Pros: less noise on the list; cons: higher latency for those interested. But, I guess, one could have BOTH: a daily message with all the commits (or a summary, if the message ends up bigger than 100K) to squeak-dev and, er, a squeak-dev-dev for the full fat option.
frank
On 24.08.2009, at 11:24, Frank Shearar wrote:
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
Hah, yes indeed :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
Well, while they are a bit noisy, I don't mind them, and they _do_ provide visibility into the process. I can't say I read all of them, but I like having the option of just skimming diffs if I feel the urge.
Other mailing lists do the same: slime-devel have a "Daily Commit Log" message. That might be an option if people find the messages TOO noisy: bundle the commits into a single message per day. Pros: less noise on the list; cons: higher latency for those interested. But, I guess, one could have BOTH: a daily message with all the commits (or a summary, if the message ends up bigger than 100K) to squeak-dev and, er, a squeak-dev-dev for the full fat option.
That's precisely what I proposed an hour before ;) Wanna work on it?
- Bert -
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 24.08.2009, at 11:24, Frank Shearar wrote:
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
Hah, yes indeed :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
Well, while they are a bit noisy, I don't mind them, and they _do_ provide visibility into the process. I can't say I read all of them, but I like having the option of just skimming diffs if I feel the urge.
Other mailing lists do the same: slime-devel have a "Daily Commit Log" message. That might be an option if people find the messages TOO noisy: bundle the commits into a single message per day. Pros: less noise on the list; cons: higher latency for those interested. But, I guess, one could have BOTH: a daily message with all the commits (or a summary, if the message ends up bigger than 100K) to squeak-dev and, er, a squeak-dev-dev for the full fat option.
That's precisely what I proposed an hour before ;) Wanna work on it?
This is a fine example of what high latency does :). I saw your earlier mail, typed up my response, and THEN read the next 10 hours or so of the list :)
Er, did I just put my neck out? I won't promise anything, but I'll definitely take a look. (I've two or three deadlines rushing down on me at the moment.)
frank
+1
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 00:07 +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
- Bert -
If we have to do anything about this then I think it is time we seriously consider a separate "squeak users" mailing list. I would rather that users have to consider going from 'developer' to 'user' rather than from 'user' to 'developer'; by which I mean that I would prefer that we change the definition of squeak-dev and make another list the 'user' list, rather than create a new developer list. Perhaps we should consider renaming the beginners list 'squeak-users' or the like. This would have the added benefit of bringing more eyes to bear on beginners requests.
Ken
2009/8/24 Ken Causey ken@kencausey.com:
+1
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 00:07 +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
- Bert -
If we have to do anything about this then I think it is time we seriously consider a separate "squeak users" mailing list. I would rather that users have to consider going from 'developer' to 'user' rather than from 'user' to 'developer'; by which I mean that I would prefer that we change the definition of squeak-dev and make another list the 'user' list, rather than create a new developer list. Perhaps we should consider renaming the beginners list 'squeak-users' or the like. This would have the added benefit of bringing more eyes to bear on beginners requests.
+1 a list name - "squeak-dev" speaks for itself. I can understand that some of list readers never contributed to squeak, or contributed occasionally, and mainly staying with it to be in touch with latest & hottest news and discussions around squeak. But let's not forget the main purpose of the list.
Do trunk commits increasing mail traffic? Absolutely. Can they be easily filtered by users who reading the list? Absolutely. So, where is the problem?
Do such commits increasing the process visibility and giving everyone a chance to evaluate and examine the changes as soon as they become available? Yes. So, given that this improves the development process (even by a bit) i think it overweights any inconveniences, such as increase in mail traffic, and everyone who understands that our main "employment" in squeak-dev list should be a development of Squeak, also should only wellcome such move :)
Ken
Whenever I'm thinking about a clever solution for a problem that I don't quite have yet, I go back to this page and meditate: http://c2.com/xp/YouArentGonnaNeedIt.html
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com wrote:
2009/8/24 Ken Causey ken@kencausey.com:
+1
On Mon, 2009-08-24 at 00:07 +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 23.08.2009, at 23:51, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Gulik.
I was curious how long it would take the first one to speak up :)
No, I would rather create a squeak-users list for those not interested in developing Squeak itself, but just "with" Squeak. IMHO the commits messages make the community development process visible, which is a Good Thing.
- Bert -
If we have to do anything about this then I think it is time we seriously consider a separate "squeak users" mailing list. I would rather that users have to consider going from 'developer' to 'user' rather than from 'user' to 'developer'; by which I mean that I would prefer that we change the definition of squeak-dev and make another list the 'user' list, rather than create a new developer list. Perhaps we should consider renaming the beginners list 'squeak-users' or the like. This would have the added benefit of bringing more eyes to bear on beginners requests.
+1 a list name - "squeak-dev" speaks for itself. I can understand that some of list readers never contributed to squeak, or contributed occasionally, and mainly staying with it to be in touch with latest & hottest news and discussions around squeak. But let's not forget the main purpose of the list.
Do trunk commits increasing mail traffic? Absolutely. Can they be easily filtered by users who reading the list? Absolutely. So, where is the problem?
Do such commits increasing the process visibility and giving everyone a chance to evaluate and examine the changes as soon as they become available? Yes. So, given that this improves the development process (even by a bit) i think it overweights any inconveniences, such as increase in mail traffic, and everyone who understands that our main "employment" in squeak-dev list should be a development of Squeak, also should only wellcome such move :)
Ken
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Michael van der Gulik mikevdg@gmail.comwrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Thanks Michael. I was going to ask that just right now. Its a lot of traffic and I am not interested in that but in squeak-dev. I think it must be in anotherr mailing list.
Gulik.
I like the commit messages. I think I may setup an inbox-rule to keep them in a nice folder, though:) - Ron
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Michael van der Gulik mikevdg@gmail.comwrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Thanks Michael. I was going to ask that just right now. Its a lot of traffic and I am not interested in that but in squeak-dev. I think it must be in anotherr mailing list.
Gulik.
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Ronald Spengler ron.spengler@gmail.comwrote:
I like the commit messages. I think I may setup an inbox-rule to keep them in a nice folder, though:)
Yes, I had to create a gmail rule to remove them
- Ron
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all.
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Thanks Michael. I was going to ask that just right now. Its a lot of traffic and I am not interested in that but in squeak-dev. I think it must be in anotherr mailing list.
Gulik.
It should perhaps be considered to have a daily or even weekly commits summary message, rather than having a message on (almost) every commit. The point of the message is to create excitement about Squeak core development, rather than annoying people, as far as I understand.
I have actually set up a filter to have commits in a separate folder. However, I would certainly keep them unfiltered if it was daily or weekly. And it should be the way to go... some commit messages spurred discussions and it's a good thing.
Ian.
I personnally prefer fine grained commit reports. The only interest of a daily/weekly commit report I see is to throw it in one click in the garbage folder...
Nicolas
2009/8/24 Ian Trudel ian.trudel@gmail.com:
It should perhaps be considered to have a daily or even weekly commits summary message, rather than having a message on (almost) every commit. The point of the message is to create excitement about Squeak core development, rather than annoying people, as far as I understand.
I have actually set up a filter to have commits in a separate folder. However, I would certainly keep them unfiltered if it was daily or weekly. And it should be the way to go... some commit messages spurred discussions and it's a good thing.
Ian.
Hello Nicolas,
What are you doing with any one of these reports once you have read it? I still think that it should be a daily or weekly digest. Then, if some people want more thorough reports, it's possible to set up a mailing list just for that.
There are more than 30 commits message since August, 20th. What it's gonna be when there will be more and more active developers? There will be no place for discussions on Squeak dev mailing list because we are flooded by reports.
I really see this step as a manner to stimulate the community to contribute. It shouldn't replace opening a Monticello browser and browse through packages, where you can see the very same descriptions and full code along side. That's how you can have thorough report rather than on a mailing list.
Ian.
2009/8/24 Nicolas Cellier nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com:
I personnally prefer fine grained commit reports. The only interest of a daily/weekly commit report I see is to throw it in one click in the garbage folder...
Nicolas
2009/8/24 Ian Trudel ian.trudel@gmail.com:
It should perhaps be considered to have a daily or even weekly commits summary message, rather than having a message on (almost) every commit. The point of the message is to create excitement about Squeak core development, rather than annoying people, as far as I understand.
I have actually set up a filter to have commits in a separate folder. However, I would certainly keep them unfiltered if it was daily or weekly. And it should be the way to go... some commit messages spurred discussions and it's a good thing.
Ian.
Ian,
Ian Trudel wrote:
I really see this step as a manner to stimulate the community to contribute.
There is value to these commit messages. It is a starting point to have discussions around that upload. It makes the feedback loop smaller (which is a good thing) and increases communication. This is a good example of that:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-August/138587.ht...
Danie,
I agree on this very point but the problem is the increasing flow of commit reports. What will happen when we get hundreds of them daily? Nobody in here can handle that much and it will become pollution rather than excitement, really.
The best way to provide and get feedback is undoubtedly in trying the trunk, update it frequently, and report abnormal things in here. Commit reports are also no a replacement for that, in my opinion.
My point isn't really about the value of commit reports but rather the value of commit reports when it comes by truck loads. It's a bit different.
Regards, Ian
2009/8/24 Danie Roux lists+squeak@danieroux.com:
Ian,
Ian Trudel wrote:
I really see this step as a manner to stimulate the community to contribute.
There is value to these commit messages. It is a starting point to have discussions around that upload. It makes the feedback loop smaller (which is a good thing) and increases communication. This is a good example of that:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-August/138587.ht...
-- Danie Roux *shuffle* Adore Unix - http://danieroux.com
On 24-Aug-09, at 12:55 AM, Ian Trudel wrote:
Danie,
I agree on this very point but the problem is the increasing flow of commit reports. What will happen when we get hundreds of them daily? Nobody in here can handle that much and it will become pollution rather than excitement, really.
That would be a great problem to have! Hundreds of commits per day. Wow. All the other Squeak distributions would be jealous of the progress we'd be making!
My point isn't really about the value of commit reports but rather the value of commit reports when it comes by truck loads. It's a bit different.
Ok... but they don't come by the truck load just yet. Why worry about it until they do?
Colin
2009/8/24 Colin Putney cputney@wiresong.ca:
That would be a great problem to have! Hundreds of commits per day. Wow. All the other Squeak distributions would be jealous of the progress we'd be making!
Obviously. =)
My point isn't really about the value of commit reports but rather the value of commit reports when it comes by truck loads. It's a bit different.
Ok... but they don't come by the truck load just yet. Why worry about it until they do?
Here's the thing: there is a lot of laissez-faire already. The image is messy, the wiki/documentation are messy, and it goes on and on. We'll fix later sounds like a motto. We certainly cannot step ahead every problem but we should at least take time to think, if only the time of a discussion.
2009/8/24 Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.de:
How about this -
PROPOSAL: we make the detailed commit notices go to a separate list as soon as someone has added a "digest" feature. This would send a daily or weekly summary to squeak-dev, containing just the commit summary a link to the detailed diffs. Bonus points for listing affected classes.
Sounds good.
Regards, Ian.
On 24-Aug-09, at 3:41 AM, Ian Trudel wrote:
Ok... but they don't come by the truck load just yet. Why worry about it until they do?
Here's the thing: there is a lot of laissez-faire already. The image is messy, the wiki/documentation are messy, and it goes on and on. We'll fix later sounds like a motto. We certainly cannot step ahead every problem but we should at least take time to think, if only the time of a discussion.
Ah, but this isn't a case of "we'll fix it later." This is "we'll fix it if it becomes a problem."
If it does become a problem, and we find we have to deal with hundreds of commit messages per day, then the best solution will likely look a bit different than one we'd choose today. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
Colin
2009/8/24 Colin Putney cputney@wiresong.ca:
Ah, but this isn't a case of "we'll fix it later." This is "we'll fix it if it becomes a problem."
If it does become a problem, and we find we have to deal with hundreds of commit messages per day, then the best solution will likely look a bit different than one we'd choose today. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
Wait a minute! You cannot just use "if it ain't broken, don't fix it." like this. This is a brand new addition to the mailing list and consequently not exactly proved useful (yet) and not entirely unanimously welcomed.
Moreover, it seems to me that you have misunderstood what Bert has suggested. There would be a mailing list with complete commit reports and Squeak dev would receive digests. The digests will point out to the complete commit reports for anyone who wants more information.
It does NOT prevent you to comment full reports at any moment (those emails could even have a reply address on squeak dev) and it does NOT force everybody to receive several reports that may or may not be interesting.
Ian.
On Monday 24 Aug 2009 4:00:20 pm Colin Putney wrote:
That would be a great problem to have! Hundreds of commits per day. Wow. All the other Squeak distributions would be jealous of the progress we'd be making!
Mmm.... posts discussing commits outnumber commits themselves (including this note :-(). There should a daily digest for comments ;-).
Subbu
2009/8/24 K. K. Subramaniam subbukk@gmail.com:
On Monday 24 Aug 2009 4:00:20 pm Colin Putney wrote:
That would be a great problem to have! Hundreds of commits per day. Wow. All the other Squeak distributions would be jealous of the progress we'd be making!
Mmm.... posts discussing commits outnumber commits themselves (including this note :-(). There should a daily digest for comments ;-).
And it should only be available encrypted with a 4 Gb key. :)
Ian.
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Michael van der Gulikmikevdg@gmail.com wrote:
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
With squeaksource, it is easy to get an RSS feed of a package. That way only people interested get noticed.
On 02.09.2009, at 09:33, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Michael van der Gulikmikevdg@gmail.com wrote:
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
With squeaksource, it is easy to get an RSS feed of a package. That way only people interested get noticed.
Why would people on squeak-dev not be interested in Squeak development?
Invisibility of the actual development process was a big problem. I'd rather have too much visibility than the impression that there is no work being done.
Btw, you and many others got an invitation to become a core developer, too. The list of current core developers on http://source.squeak.org/ (click Groups, then "Core Developers") is not even not half the number of people who got the invitation (*). This indicates to me they are not actually interested in advancing Squeak, but may I ask why not?
- Bert -
(*) If you didn't get an invitation in the first round but you have been an active contributor on squeak-dev before, we probably just missed you. Sorry, please let us know.
"Bert" == Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.de writes:
Bert> Why would people on squeak-dev not be interested in Squeak development?
Bert> Invisibility of the actual development process was a big problem. I'd Bert> rather have too much visibility than the impression that there is no Bert> work being done.
I've had people on IRC comment "I didn't realize there was so much activity on the core" regarding the emails. And the squeaksourcebot showing off the 50-150 commits a day to squeaksource in general is also good to show that there are as many packages being uploaded to Squeaksource every day as there are Perl CPAN modules, which we've often held as a sign that Perl activity is alive and well.
I agree that while we'll probably want to dial it back eventually, it's good for now that we start raising visibility in the short term.
Am 02.09.2009 um 14:30 schrieb Randal L. Schwartz:
"Bert" == Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.de writes:
Bert> Invisibility of the actual development process was a big problem. I'd Bert> rather have too much visibility than the impression that there is no Bert> work being done.
I've had people on IRC comment "I didn't realize there was so much activity on the core" regarding the emails. And the squeaksourcebot showing off the 50-150 commits a day to squeaksource in general is also good to show that there are as many packages being uploaded to Squeaksource every day as there are Perl CPAN modules, which we've often held as a sign that Perl activity is alive and well.
+10
I think having many commit messages is a great sign for our community. They are a great way to track what is being done in Squeak.
And please don't move them to another mailing list! We have already too many of them which increases fragmentation which is IMO one of the biggest challenges for the Squeak - and more general Smalltalk - community. I would kindly ask those who don't like the commit messages to use their mail client's features to handle them as they wish.
Cheers, Bernhard
I just want to echo the approval for the commit messages. I was just able to harvest Nicholas' changes for ScaledDecimal literal correctness. Very very nice (no pun intended). Strikes me that one way we could reduce the size of the commit messages is by modifying the diff algorithm to output missing or added methods not as the source with '+''s or '-''s at the start of the line, which is verbose and tedious as one has to scan all lines to verify they all begin with '+' or '-', but as "Added ClassFoo>>selector" & "Removed ClassFoo>>selector". Any volunteers? If not, where does the diff code live and I'll try and get it done.
best Eliot
On 12.09.2009, at 22:54, Eliot Miranda wrote:
I just want to echo the approval for the commit messages. I was just able to harvest Nicholas' changes for ScaledDecimal literal correctness. Very very nice (no pun intended).
Strikes me that one way we could reduce the size of the commit messages is by modifying the diff algorithm to output missing or added methods not as the source with '+''s or '-''s at the start of the line, which is verbose and tedious as one has to scan all lines to verify they all begin with '+' or '-', but as "Added ClassFoo>>selector" & "Removed ClassFoo>>selector". Any volunteers? If not, where does the diff code live and I'll try and get it done.
http://source.squeak.org/ss.html Package SqueakSource Class MCDiffyTextWriter
- Bert -
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 02.09.2009, at 09:33, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Michael van der Gulikmikevdg@gmail.com wrote:
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Which we already have.
With squeaksource, it is easy to get an RSS feed of a package. That way only people interested get noticed.
Why would people on squeak-dev not be interested in Squeak development?
1. Not having time.
2. Poluting the exisiting actual human messages with extra stuff to trawl through when you are searching for something.
3. I tried commit messages on the release list 3 years ago and it was shot down in 2 minutes, so we adopted the packages list to receive commit emails from squeaksource.
4. The more you do on trunk, the more of a porting effort is looming in the future, because trunk isn't targeted at exisiting users, nor is there a migration path for existing images. This is the same mistake made between 3.8 and 3.9, and squeak->pharo. Thus relegating existing users to stay with the images they are in now. Trunk is a fork of 3.10 and thus every commit to trunk and every commit email fills me with dread and a desire to move to a more stable platform.
If you were to make planned innovations somewhere else (i.e. the release list etc) which were delivered to the community (squeak-dev) in a documented form for exisitn 3.9/3.10 images with an impact analysis of some kind, then I could see squeak moving forwards in a useful manner. Otherwise the rest is just noise.
Keith
On 02.09.2009, at 14:32, Keith Hodges wrote:
If you were to make planned innovations somewhere else (i.e. the release list etc) which were delivered to the community (squeak-dev) in a documented form for exisitn 3.9/3.10 images with an impact analysis of some kind, then I could see squeak moving forwards in a useful manner.
Burdening a much too small release team is what held back Squeak for years. We are trying to distribute the burden onto much broader shoulders now, and it appears to encourage contributions. So no, I do not agree discussions how to evolve Squeak should happen on the release list.
- Bert -
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Keith Hodges keith_hodges@yahoo.co.ukwrote:
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 02.09.2009, at 09:33, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Michael van der Gulikmikevdg@gmail.com wrote:
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Which we already have.
With squeaksource, it is easy to get an RSS feed of a package. That way only people interested get noticed.
Why would people on squeak-dev not be interested in Squeak development?
Not having time.
Poluting the exisiting actual human messages with extra stuff to
trawl through when you are searching for something.
95% of the human messages end up in my trash unread. I'm finding about the same proportion of commit messages are relevant to me as human messages.
I'm becoming a bit of a fan of the commit messages. You can see what's happening, and it's the best forum for discussing changes.
Gulik.
2009/9/2 Michael van der Gulik mikevdg@gmail.com:
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Keith Hodges keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 02.09.2009, at 09:33, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Michael van der Gulikmikevdg@gmail.com wrote:
Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit messages going to some other dedicated mailing list?
Which we already have.
With squeaksource, it is easy to get an RSS feed of a package. That way only people interested get noticed.
Why would people on squeak-dev not be interested in Squeak development?
Not having time.
Poluting the exisiting actual human messages with extra stuff to
trawl through when you are searching for something.
95% of the human messages end up in my trash unread. I'm finding about the same proportion of commit messages are relevant to me as human messages.
I'm becoming a bit of a fan of the commit messages. You can see what's happening, and it's the best forum for discussing changes.
indeed :) sometimes i like to turn on my "exploration mode" to see what's new and what is happening around and reading commits is quite interesting way to stay in touch with latest & hottest stuff.
Gulik.
On 2009-09-02 23:12, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:32 AM, Keith Hodges <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk mailto:keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Bert Freudenberg wrote: > > On 02.09.2009, at 09:33, Damien Cassou wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Michael van der >> Gulik<mikevdg@gmail.com <mailto:mikevdg@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit >>> messages going >>> to some other dedicated mailing list? Which we already have. >> With squeaksource, it is easy to get an RSS feed of a package. That >> way only people interested get noticed. > > > Why would people on squeak-dev not be interested in Squeak development? 1. Not having time. 2. Poluting the exisiting actual human messages with extra stuff to trawl through when you are searching for something.95% of the human messages end up in my trash unread. I'm finding about the same proportion of commit messages are relevant to me as human messages.
I'm becoming a bit of a fan of the commit messages. You can see what's happening, and it's the best forum for discussing changes.
And I think the big drawback with Mantis is that is very quiet and not visible. It's a place where bugs go to be ignored most of the time.
Karl
2009/9/3 Karl Ramberg karlramberg@gmail.com:
And I think the big drawback with Mantis is that is very quiet and not visible. It's a place where bugs go to be ignored most of the time.
Karl
+1.
To my personal preferences Mantis is also a bit complicated or, to better says, not homy. And, indeed, a thing all of us are seeing all the time is squeak-dev.
Ron the bug collector says: We should still collect bugs, and have a place to put them, while we're studying them, but we shouldn't keep them very long, as they've lots to do, and little time.
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Germán Arduino garduino@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/3 Karl Ramberg karlramberg@gmail.com:
And I think the big drawback with Mantis is that is very quiet and not visible. It's a place where bugs go to be ignored most of the time.
Karl
+1.
To my personal preferences Mantis is also a bit complicated or, to better says, not homy. And, indeed, a thing all of us are seeing all the time is squeak-dev.
--
Germán S. Arduino <gsa @ arsol.net> Twitter: garduino Arduino Software & Web Hosting http://www.arduinosoftware.com PasswordsPro http://www.passwordspro.com =========================================================
Ronald Spengler wrote:
Ron the bug collector says:
We should still collect bugs, and have a place to put them, while we're studying them, but we shouldn't keep them very long, as they've lots to do, and little time.
I agree. But I will say that I much prefer contributions that go into the inbox and for two very simple reasons:
1) They have context. I don't need to worry whether the change conflicts with other changes that have happened in the meantime - Monticello takes perfectly care of that. Contrary to Mantis where you can find fixes filed out from every Squeak version under the sun (just look at the preamble of most fileouts) you know the definitive (package) version this patch was made against. You also know that whoever posted the fix must have had an image that wasn't broken beyond repair; at the very least they were able to post it. And you know that at least it has been loaded into a Squeak that was reasonably similar to yours (based on package version). All of this knowledge about the patch is immensely useful for integration.
2) It is an *extremely* efficient workflow. I can fire up Squeak, click on the inbox repository, open it. Within three clicks I can see if there has any actual code been contributed. It takes a lot more work than that to find actual code on Mantis. Then there is loading. I have Monticello already open, clicking on the package on "changes" or "merge" allows me to review the actual code against the current version within two more clicks. Compare this to Mantis where you'd download the fix to the directory, open a file list, click on the file, choose "browse changes". After loading and verifying the change there is posting it to the trunk. Monticello is still open, unless there was a issue or I needed to merge I can simply copy the version into the trunk with two more clicks. With Mantis, I load the change, then I need to find which packages are affected by it, then I need to write change log comments (possibly copying them out of the change set preambles etc).
In other words, the integration workflow with Mantis takes me somewhere between 10-15 minutes even for trivial fixes, including usages of multiple tools that aren't integrated. With Monticello and the inbox the same basic process takes me seven clicks. I've never felt anywhere near as effective for integrating stuff.
Cheers, - Andreas
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Andreas Raab -
Bernhard Pieber -
Bert Freudenberg -
Colin Putney -
Damien Cassou -
Danie Roux -
Eliot Miranda -
Frank Shearar -
Germán Arduino -
Ian Trudel -
Igor Stasenko -
K. K. Subramaniam -
Karl Ramberg -
Keith Hodges -
Ken Causey -
Mariano Martinez Peck -
merlyn＠stonehenge.com -
Michael Haupt -
Michael van der Gulik -
Nicolas Cellier -
Ronald Spengler -
Tobias Pape