[Nix-dev] On commit naming conventions

[Jonn Mostovoy]

On May 5, 2016 11:26 AM, "Arseniy Seroka" <ars.seroka at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> I'm working with PR for more than 1,5 years. I saw maybe once that a
person completely lost his interest.

I just really didn't have time / intention to support what I was packaging
:D

>
> On 5 May 2016 12:13:45 GMT+03:00, zimbatm <zimbatm at zimbatm.com> wrote:
> >This paragraph in the article sums the problem pretty much:
> >
> >> What’s even more frustrating is that even though Jane provides
> >feedback
> >quickly, often contributors lose interest and/or forget about taking
> >their
> >Pull Requests the final step after initially contributing them. The
> >apparent triviality of the changes Jane’s asking for (somewhat
> >perversely)
> >contributes to that loss of interest, since it just feels like
> >nit-picking
> >when she’s asking for the fifth overlooked stylistic change.
> >
> >Especially if the only motivation is to keep the git history pretty, it
> >doesn't play any functional role. I agree that the person merging could
> >also amend the commits but then it just shifts the burden to this group
> >of
> >people. Wouldn't we rather move forward and get even more code merged ?
> >
> >On Wed, 4 May 2016 at 13:09 Graham Christensen <graham at grahamc.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I've found this post insightful (disregard the title) about how to
> >not be
> >> too much of a stickler with new committers:
> >>
> >
https://blog.spreedly.com/2014/06/24/merge-pull-request-considered-harmful/
> >>
> >> Graham
> >>
> >> > On May 4, 2016, at 6:26 AM, zimbatm <zimbatm at zimbatm.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Each contributor has his own motivations and every round were we
> >provide
> >> feedback is another one where we might lose the contributor. He might
> >run
> >> out of energy, or have moved onto other things.
> >> >
> >> > Even after improving the CONTRIBUTING.md, naming of commits is
> >still a
> >> really big friction to getting valid code into nixpkgs. I'm talking
> >of how
> >> commits should be named after a patter like "package: init at x.y.z"
> >or
> >> "package: a.b.c -> x.y.z".
> >> >
> >> > I must admit I don't really know the motivations behind this rule.
> >All I
> >> can think of it that we could theoretically build some tooling and
> >get
> >> pretty cool stats out of it. And that spelunking git history becomes
> >a tiny
> >> bit easier.
> >> >
> >> > Given all that I think we should reconsider that rule. In my
> >opinion if
> >> a contributor submits valid nix code that is useful to the project we
> >> should just be able to merge it and move forward. For me it's more
> >> important than the commit naming rule.
> >> >
> >> > Opinions ?
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > nix-dev mailing list
> >> > nix-dev at lists.science.uu.nl
> >> > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >nix-dev mailing list
> >nix-dev at lists.science.uu.nl
> >http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iQFDBAEBCgAtJhxBcnNlbml5IFNlcm9rYSA8YXJzLnNlcm9rYUBnbWFpbC5jb20+
> BQJXKxGeAAoJEMTxMd9/e0DjfU8IAMJO1N2RFQ7GQRO3JxBPqOZB8yqkTOafoVry
> H0BHYjnCRIaLER1s6MFO6+ELf0ynhZ+aaOJcHqyV5xR5KOegeYmfk33/3BDIPZq0
> g+Hc0YfiKzq23R6PeHLm2DNE5XpMA1kzmqOeH3tEprcURhu4tgTkcaIXMxg/v/Bq
> jQKvdvsfDQJaoWKFUvGFtB0SgC7pJZ7gVEmF8EJJWDrVBNBOEZ6ncp49ewAuSPyD
> bv9QtWvek1a2RKqso6pYMWSpu3nPepsWF89kHRlPs0KCBZjhel+DZODaBHzd+Sk3
> MeFXgLK7bBIh5A58XVYCQleaZaZB8QkHBqgoKAsr9lFioDqPs8c=
> =uZUq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> nix-dev mailing list
> nix-dev at lists.science.uu.nl
> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/attachments/20160506/738727a1/attachment.html