[Dev] Contributing to [pcr]

[Luke Shumaker]

At Fri, 16 Jan 2015 16:17:40 -0300,
Nicolás Reynolds wrote:
> 
> [1  <multipart/signed (7bit)>]
> [1.1  <text/plain; utf-8 (quoted-printable)>]
> Michał Masłowski <mtjm at mtjm.eu> writes:
> 
> >> +1 though a pull request is something that only exists in github i
> >> think?
> >
> > git has a request-pull command since 2005.  Some tools use the
> > equivalent term "merge request".
> 
> i know, but it just sends an email telling you from where to pull, you
> still need to host somewhere and not everywhere has the time or
> willingness to autohost.

Between `git request-pull` and `git send-email`, I'm of the opinion
that people who think they need a website to deal with
patches/merge-requests don't know how to use their tools.

FWIW, `git send-email` probably fits our workflow better.

> >> we can receive patches on this list, but almost no one has
> >> sendmail(-like) configured on their systems (could be part of such
> >> contributing guide)
> >
> > I don't, git send-email can use e.g. SMTP or IMAP.  Some people send
> > emails via usual clients with attached patches (making review harder).
> 
> right, i forgot about smtp (local sendmail is way cooler :P)

`git send-email` has a low barrier for use; just an SMTP server
somewhere that you can send email to.  Everyone with email has one of
those.  This is all it takes (in ~/.gitconfig or ~/.config/git/config):

    [sendemail]
    	smtpencryption = ssl
    	smtpserver = plus.smtp.mail.yahoo.com
    	smtpuser = lukeshu at sbcglobal.net
    	smtpserverport = 465

That's not hard, you put that same information into whatever mail
client you use.

> >> you could also host your abslibre.git clone anywhere and ask us to pull
> >> and review from there, even github though it'd be cool if we didn't have
> >> to rely on unfree services.
> >
> > Or we could host an instance of GitLab, Gitorious or other similar
> > software.
> 
> i wouldn't mind using gitlab (i already use it for work), though it'll
> require changing our issue tracker yet another time, though it'll merge
> projects and labs subdomains.  i read trisquel is using gitlab now too.

Yes, they are: https://devel.trisquel.info/groups/trisquel

> that said i prefer gitlab over redmine and i can ask a friend who's
> hosting our gitlab in parabola for his experience setting it up.

I'm not exactly a fan of Redmine, so I guess I'm OK with that.  But
I'm not sure how I feel about GitLab.  It feels very non-KISS.  PS:
what was wrong with Flyspray, anyway?

Git is already pretty batteries-included.  I don't think it would be
terribly difficult to hammer it into doing what we want.

> > If we decide to prefer patches on the list, we need additional
> >software to know what state the patches are, so we won't forget them.
> 
> this would be awesome and more transparent for development

1) I would be beind a patches@ list or similar to
   arch-projects at lists.archlinux.org or something, that only accepts
   certain Subject:s, to separate it from the general discussion that
   happens here. (or, perhaps that should be what dev@ is, and we add
   a separate discuss@ list?)
2) What about something like Debian's bug tracker, which is
   mailing-list based?

--
Happy hacking,
~ Luke Shumaker