From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4AA513825A for ; Sun, 15 May 2016 11:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CA3D21432C; Sun, 15 May 2016 11:16:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B927E1425F for ; Sun, 15 May 2016 11:16:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (c-73-53-75-119.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [73.53.75.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zlg) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1D31340BFD for ; Sun, 15 May 2016 11:16:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: eclass/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <1462655928.66afcab271f65b97330e610040ad3acc1b812a03.hd_brummy@gentoo> <1537862.pH6huOSrz0@localhost> <2471981.YXCVhQinPE@localhost> <20160515122931.62603b62.mgorny@gentoo.org> From: Daniel Campbell Message-ID: <4504fd28-f9fa-031b-5d9b-9e13c8cafbb9@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 04:16:30 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160515122931.62603b62.mgorny@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ineEkvtDEdoG6hEUfwBl5NKscrdDMlXsm" X-Archives-Salt: 129f7a99-7208-4897-81a0-8e81fd5a2fc2 X-Archives-Hash: 8fa2481f7871ff0f16dc90aeeca5ea03 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --ineEkvtDEdoG6hEUfwBl5NKscrdDMlXsm Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="TUgc8jL2OffNllDhQ2GSSOOaXtmtS67JR" From: Daniel Campbell To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <4504fd28-f9fa-031b-5d9b-9e13c8cafbb9@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: eclass/ References: <1462655928.66afcab271f65b97330e610040ad3acc1b812a03.hd_brummy@gentoo> <1537862.pH6huOSrz0@localhost> <2471981.YXCVhQinPE@localhost> <20160515122931.62603b62.mgorny@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20160515122931.62603b62.mgorny@gentoo.org> --TUgc8jL2OffNllDhQ2GSSOOaXtmtS67JR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 05/15/2016 03:29 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > On Sun, 15 May 2016 08:40:39 +0900 > Aaron Bauman wrote: >=20 >> On Saturday, May 14, 2016 9:54:11 AM JST Rich Freeman wrote: >>> On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Aaron Bauman wrote= : =20 >>>> On Friday, May 13, 2016 4:52:09 PM JST Ian Delaney wrote: =20 >>>>> On Sat, 7 May 2016 23:25:58 +0200 >>>>> >>>>> Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: =20 >>>>>> Do you seriously expect this code to work? How about testing? Or >>>>>> reading diffs before committing? =20 >>>> >>>> Absolutely nothing wrong was said here. Obviously the code was not = tested >>>> and Michal pointed that out very plainly. =20 >>> >>> It is actually possible to communicate both plainly and politely at >>> the same time. This does not require sacrificing any commitment to >>> quality at all. Really the only downside is having more of an >>> appearance of professionalism. =20 >> >> Please enlighten me as to what was impolite here? The strong language= of=20 >> "seriously" or definitively stating that the individual did not perfor= m the=20 >> necessary QA actions before committing? Both of which are completely = called=20 >> for and appropriate. No vulgarity, insults, or demeaning words were u= sed. =20 >> How would you have responded professionally? >=20 > Since the anti-productivity of this thread is getting impressively high= > even for Gentoo standards, I'd like to point out a few things. >=20 > It was impolite. It was supposed to be. Not offensive but impolite. It > ain't cool to get responses like this but it ain't cool to break stuff > like this either. >=20 > For those who don't have a broader view, it wasn't a single commit but > a followup to a commit adding EAPI=3D6 support to the eclass -- clearly= > untested. I didn't bother complaining about the first one since issues > would clearly pop up if someone actually tried to use the eclass > in EAPI=3D6. However, the second commit actually introduced a syntax > error that broke all the ebuilds, including stable and caused metadata > generation failure. This is real bad. >=20 > Of course, it could have been worse. It looks like no ebuilds with > EAPI=3D6 'support' were committed following the eclass. Which is a good= > sign that some testing eventually occurred. However, is it that much of= > an effort to test eclass changes using ebuilds *before* committing it? > It wasn't that hard even in times of CVS (esp. that we're talking about= > separate directories), and it is even easier in times of git. >=20 > I don't really see the benefit of whole of this discussion. He > committed a bad thing, I shouted at him, end of story. If you want to > take it to comrel, just do it. However, discussing whether it was right= > or wrong is really unproductive here. >=20 I felt it was a bit strong, but you make a good case. There certainly is a balance. One can't coddle someone who's breaking the tree, especially when we expect people to test before committing. Since it was an eclass, wasn't that supposed to be discussed on here first, too? Still, we're going to make mistakes and dressing someone down won't fix it. When I was adding multilib support to media-sound/apulse I recall you strongly telling me that I screwed up and it shouldn't have been done the way I originally committed. There wasn't a nudge in the right direction, though. I imagine it was clear that I hadn't done multilib scripts before. If I had been more sensitive or less willing to fix it, what would have happened? You or someone else may have reverted it and/or reported to QA and started a ruckus. I mean, I don't hold a grudge or anything. I'm glad you told me it wasn't right, because if I'm contributing to Gentoo I want it to be done well. I learned something from it. But a dev being told that they're screwing up without also being specific (or at least a hint) about a way to fix it or *why* it's wrong doesn't help them fix their screw up and ensure it doesn't happen again. That sort of criticism, which may be warranted in terms of "they screwed the tree up due to something stupid!", isn't productive if the dev doesn't know how to fix it. This particular screw-up is different since it was simpler, but less trivial screw ups do happen and without _constructive_ criticism, devs (and Gentoo, by extension) won't get better. --=20 Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 --TUgc8jL2OffNllDhQ2GSSOOaXtmtS67JR-- --ineEkvtDEdoG6hEUfwBl5NKscrdDMlXsm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXOFqOAAoJEAEkDpRQOeFwbToP/2byL5qwrxzgblZV7gz6WPCy zKSrV6xBvhPqx2ZmusHAvhneNaq/QFRuKOKZAd2LTjJt2AU7m3RjIU5CbY947m2H E5qYiqeIyNp40Jp8BLPKhnMeLArFkAFLgQVbn0D3QPwhITC3/ZARSKmCR4VxqeTW +PmeRZUZqPWwL340zN6tptoTKolEXbDEcNkL54LXv3tRduiPekT0gANOlGq9bR3s ybCx40oGUfYpyqNi7EOy1LMAP/6OYkl8CrmvtDuQrzTrnwOG2ndUSRO2lDUda99e 42OkUjMY0uiOY2ZjxuWYbRVCp3MUhCooP3mX3opNMYi0Yju86LLiN7xJ9NSJQcLD 1xOwfDZZNfBcCYHL5vgOxa7nK7Czrpaubir3QNqWOyTASVHIFuzm439p7UKjUM9w PpblCz07AaUh1tIUc8mNSUbscD5kWIRgLr2rV0NNKpUxLeFpOM9tBTZuQ3qmwTeV R8R7HGDZyS4wtTZwmBhLriPe5fL/KnT/oddLNz44ZWXMycsyCfQO5aACKvU0D2s4 y0t7+jL6uTIuivYsKER/CFWUqyyMntCNTJSLWxenBP671sXozjMgQ7ZHAfcYDuyI qiHZcUi36ZmHXoxvr8IHUvZefBra4MWeTQIkivmahB2XJBM+LQvBVDkvfe5EyIFE Sn55Ys3SOHW517tcTRvd =N5lQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ineEkvtDEdoG6hEUfwBl5NKscrdDMlXsm--