Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (155 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Re: Proper version scheme for packages from git, hg, svn, ...

On Tuesday 2014-01-14 16:36, Adam Spiers wrote:

In both cases significant enough to just walk away.

I really cannot understand this. I have already given two very clear
benefits of adhering to a github-oriented workflow, namely transparent
peer code review, and automated testing via Travis. Despite this you
have stated, without any explanation why, that you are not prepared to
spend the 60 seconds required to create a github account

Because it's another account that wants to be managed. It's more than
60 seconds in the long run. I could make it a trash account, but I'd
forget those even faster and would have to recreate one everytime.
It's all the reason (I would envision) why the kernel is still
developed on a mailing list and nothing else - even their bugzilla
is optional.

The success of this feedback loop depends on the willingness of both
parties to iterate until there is consensus. It will *not* succeed
if the contributor simply throws a bunch of patches over the wall
and then walks off expecting the maintainer to do the rest of the

Well for one, you _called_ for patches. Don't complain if you
get some ;)

Rejecting a patch that fails to apply with TortoiseSVN even though it
is totally compliant to the unified diff specification is something
not within my maintainer ideals.

Please can you explain how that is relevant here?

It's one of my experiences where "Submit it in a format the
maintainer wants" was driven too far.

If the thing is on review on github, good. If not, screw it. I don't
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >