[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: changes in chord names formatting (1503, 1572) (issue 4981052)

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: changes in chord names formatting (1503, 1572) (issue 4981052)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 16:28:53 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:00:41PM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:13:28AM +0000, Peekay Ex wrote:
> > One patch per tracker item?
> I can do that if noone objects to tracker items for patches as trivial
> as converting tabs to whitespace?

I'd rather not see those patches.

Hmm, I'm seeing 11 patches?  how hard would it be to do some
intelligent rebasing here?  i.e. rebase any programming features /
bugfixes into one (or more) patches, rebase the ly file fixes into
one (or more) patches, etc.

I mean, c6fe8a can easily be... oh wait, no it can't.  MAO!  we
don't like changes like that.  We really, really don't like
changes like that.

Could I interest you in scheme indentation:

with about 30 - 90 minutes of work, we can settle these IDIOTIC
indentation commits once and for all.  Get the tool finalized, run
it on all the scm files, and then celebrate.  We (finally) did
this with C++ over the summer... the whole debate and work on the
tools took at least 40 hours of developer time, but it was worth

Unfortunately, the scheme indentation stuff stalled in August due
to a number of factors.  Which was a shame, because scheme
indentation is WAY easier than C++ indentation, and also because
the indentation script was almost finished.

> > Sorry to belabor the point, but it is unlikely you are going to get
> > much review if those that understand this stuff (I don't, I just push
> > and pull and test formatted patches) have to get patches from a third
> > place.
> Hmm, well if everyone (including you) is already familiar with 'git
> pull' then doing 'git fetch' doesn't seem like a big stretch,

We're not comfortable with git.  Other than 4 or 5 people, each
person who's started pushing to dev/staging has required between 3
and 10 emails to get them able to reliably push to a branch
without screwing stuff up.

> If Rietveld doesn't support multiple patches per issue then that
> sounds like a fundamental flaw to me and perhaps it's time to
> reconsider moving to Gerrit.

Stop right there.  This debate has chewed up about 25 hours of
developer time so far, with no end in sight.  I realize that
you're an excellent person to move it forward, but I don't want to
hear about it right now.

I'm vetoing this discussion for 5 weeks.  Wait until you know us
better (in particular, the relative lack of technical ability),
wait until we know you better, wait until our Grand Organization
Project starts up again.  this, incidently, is exactly GOP 13:

Moving back to the jazz patches: Carl, could you take a look at
his git repo and suggest any way of moving forward?

Also, with no disrespect intended, let's leave James out of the
loop now.  We need a senior developer looking at this, not our
only documentation writer.

- Graham

reply via email to

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