[Sugar-devel] Community (was: Re: Bug tracking Vs Patch review)
sascha-ml-reply-to-2010-2 at silbe.org
Tue Aug 31 06:49:03 EDT 2010
Excerpts from Tomeu Vizoso's message of Tue Aug 31 10:33:40 +0200 2010:
> Yes, we agreed on that, but then, just for the sake of argument,
> several unchecked statements were made that unfairly represented the
> current Sugar development model and the work of several members of our
> Again, you are misrepresenting me just for the sake of argument,
> And we are going to fix this by throwing shit to our colleagues.
> One person is working on merging them, several others have preferred
> just to complain about it.
> Visible because someone has invested a lot of time giving it
> visibility in the mailing list and made bombastic statements so other
> people were forcedly dragged into the discussion?
And so on.
Please sit back, have a cup of your favourite beverage and relax.
We all care very much about Sugar. But we should care equally much about
each other, not engage in dirty fights. If you want to blow off some
steam, please consider organising a Sugar Labs deathmatch  and/or
co-op match  instead. Sauerbraten  not only has nice, clean,
easily hackable code and an in-game map editor, but is also a fun and
awesome-looking game (though it doesn't have a co-op match mode, only
FWIW, I can totally relate to Bernie; I have even stopped trying to get
most of my patches into mainline, including bug fixes. So we definitely
need to find some solution. Not necessarily THE solution; we can always
revise the process. But the current state hurts us (= Sugar Labs) very
What do you think about a model where we have some git repo that
everyone can commit to after they got, say, at least two Reviewed-By
(including one from a core / "long"-term developer)? The contributors
would get more testing of their work (=> less bugs in the release) and
the module maintainers would be able to pick resp. skip the patches they
feel (un)comfortable with.
Another idea would be a mailing list where early versions of patches are
posted and can get some (incomplete) review. This would allow
contributors to get fast & easy feedback with a limited amount of time
spent for the reviewers. Reviews could just point out a subset of issues;
a thorough review and deciding whether it's good enough to be merged
would happen like above.
This would be a perfect fit for a Sugar Camp session; unfortunately I
don't see one coming up at any place I could commit on attending in
the near future. But maybe you (Tomeu), Aleksey, Bernie and James
(Cameron) could try a face-to-face meeting to lay some foundation?
I imagine Mel would be an awesome moderator.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20100831/e85805de/attachment.pgp
More information about the Sugar-devel