[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GNU GRUB maintenance

From: Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
Subject: Re: GNU GRUB maintenance
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:10:55 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.2.0

On 08.10.2015 16:52, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hello, all. I'm sorry for not being available to do enough maintenance
>> for GRUB in last time but I was overbooked. Yet there is a good news. At
>> Google there is a 20% project and GRUB has been approved as 20% project
>> for me. The goal is to have 2.02 released before the end of this year.
>> Other than the raw lack of time there is another issue which makes
>> maintenance difficult: inefficient VCS.
> VCS is actually OK. The project of size Linux kernel seems to work
> well using pull request e-mails. The disadvantages are
> - contributors must have repository available via Internet
> - contributors are trusted to actually submit pull request for branch
> that was reviewed
> - it needs to be done locally and pushed
>>                                                       It requires me or 
>> someone with
>> privileges manually copy the patch. What other systems would be ok? It
>> obviously has to be a free software and hosted on free software-friendly
>> hosting. It also has to have an efficient 1-click merge (so that someone
>> with privileges can get any patch submitted to the system merged in
>> couple of clicks).
> It does not like like we have much choice. If we speak about free
> external hosting, this is probably github, gerrithub, gitlab. I do not
> know if any of them is considered friendly enough by FSF.
> If we speak about self hosting, then it is probably gerrit and
> reviewboard (I wish we could join KDE reviewboard, but grub hardly can
> be called KDE application ... :) )
> I am not thrilled by github workflows. From what I could gather
> gerrithub looks more appealing, but would love to hear from someone
> who actually used both.
I spoke with Stefan Reinauer and he proposed to host us at if we don't generate too much traffic. I had
positive experiences with their gerrit except that some functions are
broken on mobile. I'd like to be able to review from phone but it's not
a hard requirement.
> One problem is that none of them apparently allows reviewing by
> E-Mail. This worked (and probably works, just I'm no more involved)
> quite well in KDE reviewboard. This means all review must be done via
> web. For me it is rather disadvantage.
That's a disadvantage but I believe that being able to get changes
merged quickly outweights this disadvantage.
> Also merged requests are
> removed, which means history and past discussions are no more present.
They're kept on case
> Which again is better using e-mail review.
> _______________________________________________
> Grub-devel mailing list
> address@hidden

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]