salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
48 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Holger Wansing-4
Hi all,

how is the new Salsa collaborative concept supposed to work with the "old"
workflow in Debian?

Means: it seems to me, that with Salsa there is a second parallel world is
getting evolved (in parallel to the old world: BTS, mailinglists ...),
containing things like patches in form of merge requests, which do not interact
well with the old world (BTS, mailinglists).
It looks to me, that many merge requests are lying around on Salsa, but the
responsible package maintainers / teams are not aware of them.

As far as I see it for installer team for example, the debian-boot mailinglist
does not get a mail forwarded, when a installer repo gets a merge request.
Isn't that the way, how it should work?
Comparing Salsa with the BTS, it should work that way IMO.
When writing comments on those merge requests, who gets those messages?
I had the impression that the responsible people are not getting involved.

Or similar seems to be the case for debian-doc, too...

Maybe I'm completely wrong here, or it's just these few packages/teams, where
this is not optimal?

How is this all set up, how is it supposed to work?


Holger

--
Holger Wansing <[hidden email]>
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Jacob Adams-2

On Oct 27, 2018, at 09:20, Holger Wansing <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,

how is the new Salsa collaborative concept supposed to work with the "old"
workflow in Debian?

Means: it seems to me, that with Salsa there is a second parallel world is
getting evolved (in parallel to the old world: BTS, mailinglists ...),
containing things like patches in form of merge requests, which do not interact
well with the old world (BTS, mailinglists).
It looks to me, that many merge requests are lying around on Salsa, but the
responsible package maintainers / teams are not aware of them.

I started a thread about this a while back:


https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00231.html


The consensus seems to be that people should enable email notifications in salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request. 


https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00235.html


https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00259.html


Jacob

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Joseph Herlant
Hi,

> The consensus seems to be that people should enable email notifications in salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request.

That's indeed the best way to make the bridge between the BTS and the
merge requests on Salsa.

Note that you can enable the notification programmatically globally,
at the team level or at the repo level using the API [1].
If you do end up writing a script for that, you could probably add it
with the other nice salsa-related tools in the salsa-scripts repo [2].

Lately I've been wondering if it wouldn't be nice to see the open
MR/issues on the DMD [3] or on tracker.d.o (haven't looked further but
it might also be interesting to see it there).

[1] https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/notification_settings.html
[2]  https://salsa.debian.org/mehdi/salsa-scripts
[3] https://udd.debian.org/dmd/

Joseph

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Holger Wansing-4
Hi,

Joseph Herlant <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > The consensus seems to be that people should enable email notifications in
> > salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request.
>
> That's indeed the best way to make the bridge between the BTS and the
> merge requests on Salsa.

Unsure, if this is an acceptable solution:
- since filing such bugreports is a manual step
- and most Debian volunteers are short on time
this is most likely to not happen very often IMO.
At least there is still a high chance for that merge requests, to rott on
Salsa for a long time.

Also, that would lead to two different places, where discussions on the
topic might be running, with different audience, which are not aware of
the other site.

And: for small things, that might be not worth a bugreport, one could think
that a merge request at salsa is a suitable way, but if package maintainers
are not aware of it, ...

In summary, this sounds like a semi-optimal solution to me.


Holger


--
Holger Wansing <[hidden email]>
PGP-Finterprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Adam Borowski-3
In reply to this post by Jacob Adams-2
On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 12:46:00PM -0400, Jacob Adams wrote:
> > On Oct 27, 2018, at 09:20, Holger Wansing <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > It looks to me, that many merge requests are lying around on Salsa, but the
> > responsible package maintainers / teams are not aware of them.
>
> The consensus seems to be that people should enable email notifications in
> salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request.

Except doing that manually just doesn't work:
* new maintainers don't know this bit of tribal knowledge
* it's obscure even for the oldies
* you're 99% likely to forget it when adding a new repo

Case in point: despite me having read the previous thread, and having set my
repos accordingly (I don't even remember how to do that anymore!), there's
a request rotting on a recent package:
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu/merge_requests

I did make an unrelated upload of that package, but of course didn't notice
the request -- you typically don't touch salsa anymore if you use git's
command-line interface, and by default there's no notification whatsoever.
So the fixes sit there, the contributor feels ignored, and improvements grow
conflicts with new upstream code.  Not cool.

So no, neither the maintainer nor the requester remember to do such extra
steps (they're not needed eg. on GitHub).  They must either be done
automatically or the GitLab functionality disabled or at least adorned with
in-your-face warnings.


Meow!
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Have you heard of the Amber Road?  For thousands of years, the
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ Romans and co valued amber, hauled through the Europe over the
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ mountains and along the Vistula, from Gdańsk.  To where it came
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ together with silk (judging by today's amber stalls).

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Mattia Rizzolo-5
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 01:11:28PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:

> Case in point: despite me having read the previous thread, and having set my
> repos accordingly (I don't even remember how to do that anymore!), there's
> a request rotting on a recent package:
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu/merge_requests
>
> I did make an unrelated upload of that package, but of course didn't notice
> the request -- you typically don't touch salsa anymore if you use git's
> command-line interface, and by default there's no notification whatsoever.
> So the fixes sit there, the contributor feels ignored, and improvements grow
> conflicts with new upstream code.  Not cool.
At least now DDPO shows such things in the VCS column.  I think the "!1"
is way too small and very easy to miss, but that can be improved if
anybody has a shed of ability with UIx/CSS… (which I don't)

--
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

David Bremner
Mattia Rizzolo <[hidden email]> writes:

> At least now DDPO shows such things in the VCS column.  I think the "!1"
> is way too small and very easy to miss, but that can be improved if
> anybody has a shed of ability with UIx/CSS… (which I don't)

I'm not especially proud of it, but I mostly won't see things that don't
arrive in my mailbox. Polling web pages just isn't going to happen for
me. I understand other people have different ways of working, but I
suspect I'm not alone on relying on problems being reported (typically
by the BTS).

d

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Adam Borowski-3
In reply to this post by Mattia Rizzolo-5
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 01:14:29PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 01:11:28PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote:
> > Case in point: despite me having read the previous thread, and having set my
> > repos accordingly (I don't even remember how to do that anymore!), there's
> > a request rotting on a recent package:
> >
> > I did make an unrelated upload of that package, but of course didn't notice
> > the request -- you typically don't touch salsa anymore if you use git's
>
> At least now DDPO shows such things in the VCS column.  I think the "!1"
> is way too small and very easy to miss, but that can be improved if
> anybody has a shed of ability with UIx/CSS… (which I don't)

Which is exactly the way I managed to notice the request.  Big thanks for
whoever added the !1 -- otherwise it'd wait there ad calendas graecas.

But as you say, it's not enough, and even people who look at DDPO frequently
are going to miss that bit.  Making the !1 stand out is probably not a good
idea, though -- just like bugs tagged +patch, making pull requests sit there
forever (with an ongoing discussion or not), is not that bad.  It's only the
initial notification that's vital.  And for that, the DDPO page is a poor
fit -- it's great for a status overview at a glance, not for timely
notifications.


Meow!
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Have you heard of the Amber Road?  For thousands of years, the
⣾⠁⢰⠒⠀⣿⡁ Romans and co valued amber, hauled through the Europe over the
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ mountains and along the Vistula, from Gdańsk.  To where it came
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ together with silk (judging by today's amber stalls).

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Jacob Adams-2
In reply to this post by Adam Borowski-3

> On Oct 28, 2018, at 08:11, Adam Borowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 12:46:00PM -0400, Jacob Adams wrote:
>>> On Oct 27, 2018, at 09:20, Holger Wansing <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> It looks to me, that many merge requests are lying around on Salsa, but the
>>> responsible package maintainers / teams are not aware of them.
>>
>> The consensus seems to be that people should enable email notifications in
>> salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request.
>
> Except doing that manually just doesn't work:
> * new maintainers don't know this bit of tribal knowledge
> * it's obscure even for the oldies
> * you're 99% likely to forget it when adding a new repo
>
> Case in point: despite me having read the previous thread, and having set my
> repos accordingly (I don't even remember how to do that anymore!), there's
> a request rotting on a recent package:
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu
> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu/merge_requests
>
> I did make an unrelated upload of that package, but of course didn't notice
> the request -- you typically don't touch salsa anymore if you use git's
> command-line interface, and by default there's no notification whatsoever.
> So the fixes sit there, the contributor feels ignored, and improvements grow
> conflicts with new upstream code.  Not cool.
>
> So no, neither the maintainer nor the requester remember to do such extra
> steps (they're not needed eg. on GitHub).  They must either be done
> automatically or the GitLab functionality disabled or at least adorned with
> in-your-face warnings.

I completely agree with you. The above is simply the best solution currently.
To quote from my last message in the previous thread:
“My concern is that newcomers will have their merge requests ignored when maintainers are not emailed. I see no workable solution as yet, so I’ll have to look more into this and come back to this thread when I find one.”

I haven’t yet
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Jacob Adams-2

> On Oct 28, 2018, at 09:44, Jacob Adams <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 28, 2018, at 08:11, Adam Borowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 12:46:00PM -0400, Jacob Adams wrote:
>>>> On Oct 27, 2018, at 09:20, Holger Wansing <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It looks to me, that many merge requests are lying around on Salsa, but the
>>>> responsible package maintainers / teams are not aware of them.
>>>
>>> The consensus seems to be that people should enable email notifications in
>>> salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request.
>>
>> Except doing that manually just doesn't work:
>> * new maintainers don't know this bit of tribal knowledge
>> * it's obscure even for the oldies
>> * you're 99% likely to forget it when adding a new repo
>>
>> Case in point: despite me having read the previous thread, and having set my
>> repos accordingly (I don't even remember how to do that anymore!), there's
>> a request rotting on a recent package:
>> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu
>> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/boohu/merge_requests
>>
>> I did make an unrelated upload of that package, but of course didn't notice
>> the request -- you typically don't touch salsa anymore if you use git's
>> command-line interface, and by default there's no notification whatsoever.
>> So the fixes sit there, the contributor feels ignored, and improvements grow
>> conflicts with new upstream code.  Not cool.
>>
>> So no, neither the maintainer nor the requester remember to do such extra
>> steps (they're not needed eg. on GitHub).  They must either be done
>> automatically or the GitLab functionality disabled or at least adorned with
>> in-your-face warnings.
>
> I completely agree with you. The above is simply the best solution currently.
> To quote from my last message in the previous thread:
> “My concern is that newcomers will have their merge requests ignored when maintainers are not emailed. I see no workable solution as yet, so I’ll have to look more into this and come back to this thread when I find one.”
>
> I haven’t yet

Apologies, sent before completing my thought.

I haven’t yet found a workable solution. Ideally we’d change the default notification settings in Salsa to always send emails but that won’t work because then all DDs would get emails about all the merge requests in the Debian group.

Jacob
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Steve McIntyre
In reply to this post by David Bremner
David Bremner wrote:
>
>I'm not especially proud of it, but I mostly won't see things that don't
>arrive in my mailbox. Polling web pages just isn't going to happen for
>me. I understand other people have different ways of working, but I
>suspect I'm not alone on relying on problems being reported (typically
>by the BTS).

Nod - that's exactly my workflow too.

--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                [hidden email]
"Further comment on how I feel about IBM will appear once I've worked out
 whether they're being malicious or incompetent. Capital letters are forecast."
 Matthew Garrett, http://www.livejournal.com/users/mjg59/30675.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Joseph Herlant-2
In reply to this post by Jacob Adams-2
> “My concern is that newcomers will have their merge requests ignored when maintainers are not emailed. I see no workable solution as yet, so I’ll have to look more into this and come back to this thread when I find one.”

I wonder if we should have a custom integration enabled like we do for
setting the tags pending. It would send an email to the maintainer
when a MR or an issue would be created.
I don't expect Salsa to be aware of the Maintainer and Uploader fields
of a package, so a custom integration would make sense to me.
This change could be scripted globally and also added to the
salsa-scripts for when you create a repo.
Does that sound like a reasonable solution?

Joseph

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Ian Jackson-2
Joseph Herlant writes ("Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such"):
> I wonder if we should have a custom integration enabled like we do for
> setting the tags pending. It would send an email to the maintainer
> when a MR or an issue would be created.
> I don't expect Salsa to be aware of the Maintainer and Uploader fields
> of a package, so a custom integration would make sense to me.
> This change could be scripted globally and also added to the
> salsa-scripts for when you create a repo.
> Does that sound like a reasonable solution?

Yes.  I think it will have to be enabled by default.

If people don't like the emails it generates, this should be "fixed"
by disabling MRs rather than by disabling the email bridge.

Do you know how to write such a thing ?  Where would it be
configured ?  (Eg, what if I want to add a configurable feature to
automatically turn an MR into a series of patchbomb emails rather than
one email?)

Ian.

--
Ian Jackson <[hidden email]>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Joseph Herlant-2
Hi Ian,

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 3:51 AM Ian Jackson
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> If people don't like the emails it generates, this should be "fixed"
> by disabling MRs rather than by disabling the email bridge.
>
> Do you know how to write such a thing ?  Where would it be
> configured ?  (Eg, what if I want to add a configurable feature to
> automatically turn an MR into a series of patchbomb emails rather than
> one email?)

If you would go for the solution I described, you'd enable a webhook
in settings > integration of your project (you'd first need to write
such integration and serve it somewhere as an endpoint).
Note that this would only be if you need to send to a specific team.
If it's for individual emails, you really should go with the built-in
"watch" on the repository as described earlier in the thread.

Joseph

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Matthew Vernon-2
In reply to this post by Jacob Adams-2
Jacob Adams <[hidden email]> writes:

> The consensus seems to be that people should enable email
> notifications in salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request.
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00235.html
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00259.html

Relatedly, what's the etiquette about commits to master? I recently
discovered that someone else had pushed a commit to the tip of master of
one of the packages I maintain (and not notified me); when I complained
I was told that emailing would be too much effort. Am I wrong to feel
that at least a MR is something I should have expected as a package
maintainer, not just commits to master?

[I don't really mean to have a go at the person concerned; I'd just like
to know what to expect in future...]

Regards,

Matthew

--
"At least you know where you are with Microsoft."
"True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle."
http://www.debian.org

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Roberto C. Sánchez-2
On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 03:00:03PM +0000, Matthew Vernon wrote:

>
> Relatedly, what's the etiquette about commits to master? I recently
> discovered that someone else had pushed a commit to the tip of master of
> one of the packages I maintain (and not notified me); when I complained
> I was told that emailing would be too much effort. Am I wrong to feel
> that at least a MR is something I should have expected as a package
> maintainer, not just commits to master?
>
> [I don't really mean to have a go at the person concerned; I'd just like
> to know what to expect in future...]
>
That seems completely reasonable.  Making the repository accessible to
others is a courtesy that should not be abused.  Pushing directly to the
master branch of a package for which one is not an active maintainer or
contributor is at a minimum impolite.

Regards,

-Roberto

--
Roberto C. Sánchez

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Guillem Jover
In reply to this post by Matthew Vernon-2
Hi!

On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 15:00:03 +0000, Matthew Vernon wrote:

> Jacob Adams <[hidden email]> writes:
> > The consensus seems to be that people should enable email
> > notifications in salsa and open a bug when filing a merge request.
> >
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00235.html
> >
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00259.html
>
> Relatedly, what's the etiquette about commits to master? I recently
> discovered that someone else had pushed a commit to the tip of master of
> one of the packages I maintain (and not notified me); when I complained
> I was told that emailing would be too much effort. Am I wrong to feel
> that at least a MR is something I should have expected as a package
> maintainer, not just commits to master?

Assuming that packages is under the Salsa Debian namespace, then I
think that's what you (perhaps unknowingly :) signed up for when
adding a repo there. See the Collab-maint sections in:

  <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2017/12/msg00003.html>

and

  <https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.22Debian.22_group>

Because, I'm not sure what's the point of hosting a git repo, on a
platform like gitlab with its trivial forking facilities, on a group
with wide write permissions, if you don't want others to directly
write to it? :)

Thanks,
Guillem

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Matthew Vernon-2
On 06/11/2018 15:32, Guillem Jover wrote:

> Because, I'm not sure what's the point of hosting a git repo, on a
> platform like gitlab with its trivial forking facilities, on a group
> with wide write permissions, if you don't want others to directly
> write to it? :)

Hm, I had not quite appreciated that was the expected behaviour. Ah
well, I can move it :)

Regards,

Matthew

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Felipe Sateler-2
In reply to this post by Roberto C. Sánchez-2
On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 10:17:01 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 03:00:03PM +0000, Matthew Vernon wrote:
>>
>> Relatedly, what's the etiquette about commits to master? I recently
>> discovered that someone else had pushed a commit to the tip of master
>> of one of the packages I maintain (and not notified me); when I
>> complained I was told that emailing would be too much effort. Am I
>> wrong to feel that at least a MR is something I should have expected as
>> a package maintainer, not just commits to master?
>>
>> [I don't really mean to have a go at the person concerned; I'd just
>> like to know what to expect in future...]
>>
> That seems completely reasonable.  Making the repository accessible to
> others is a courtesy that should not be abused.  Pushing directly to the
> master branch of a package for which one is not an active maintainer or
> contributor is at a minimum impolite.

I disagree when it comes to the debian namespace, and the documentation
agrees with me[1].

I agree that one should exercise judgement: I wouldn't commit an
intrusive patch without discussing first. But there are many changes that
do not need discussion. But for example, about a month ago Ondřej Nový
changed the Format: url of d/copyright to use https on one of my packages
(and I assume a lot more), and didn't notify me. I don't think it is
reasonable to ask for coordination for this type of changes, and I would
agree that even notifying is too much effort if this was done salsa-wide.
Some fixes are better just done than talked about :).

BTW, thanks Ondřej Nový for those "editorial" fixes!

Additionally, if one is doing an NMU, I think that should be pushed to
salsa if the permissions allow it.


[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Salsa/Doc#Collaborative_Maintenance:_.
22Debian.22_group



--
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: salsa.debian.org: merge requests and such

Roberto C. Sánchez-2
On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 03:43:41PM +0000, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>
> I disagree when it comes to the debian namespace, and the documentation
> agrees with me[1].
>
Interesting.  I was not aware of that.  Thanks for sharing.

Regards,

-Roberto

--
Roberto C. Sánchez

123