> From: Files [mailto:files@poetryunlimited.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 2:00 AM
> Ok. Maybe someone needs to explain this to me once and for all.
>
> I was backlogging the changes made over the course of 6982-current.
>
> Was I supposed to go back and fix all the log messages that didn't
> contain enough information? OMG. You can't be serious.
Can't we? We are. A log msg is per commit. svn log has to be able
to spit out a log message that matches a certain revision in the future.
Papering over earlier mistakes in a future log message isn't helping
in that respect.
> Second. I followed what was in the HACKING file. It said nothing about
> explaining anything except for individual files. Did I miss that too?
No, it isn't in HACKING AFAIK. If you took some time to read examples
of previous log messages you would have seen this in practice though.
It's just courtesy to your fellow committers (and reviewers!), so that
they have to spend less time on review.
> Third. I copied the example Sander gave me. And I paraphrased the copy
> that Ben Sussman gave me.
I was giving an example based on your log message. I didn't count on
the fact that your long log message contained references to files that
weren't even touched in the commit. It's a good thing that there is
always someone keeping a sharp eye (Philip in this case).
> Fourth. Mandrake 9.1 Bamboo is the stable rev I have right now. A whole
> bunch of people think that the other directories should go away. So I've
> been trying to get the 9.1 version stable, and trying to figure out a
> way to consolidate the whole thing into one directory. Seeing as that's
> what people were complaining about initially.
>
> Where are all the critics when you need 'em BEFORE you make the change.
It doesn't work that way.
> Ben!!!! Help!!!!!!!
>
>
> On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 18:44, Philip Martin wrote:
> >
> > When the change is spread over several files then start with a brief
> > (one sentence, perhaps two) overview of the change.
> >
> > "Update Madrake package build to add support for Java." or whatever
> > this change did.
>
> How about "IT FREAKING JUST DID NOT WORK UNTIL I FIXED IT. IT WAS
> COMPLETELY BUSTED. I FIXED IT OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF MY HEART. IF YOU
> WOULD LIKE IT BACK THE WAY IT WAS LET ME KNOW."
No need to shout. Especially not at someone who is trying to help you
here.
> I apologize, but Ben NEVER asked me to put something on top.
>
> >
> > > * 46_mod_dav_svn.conf
> >
> > * packages/rpm/mandrake-9.1/46_mod_dav_svn.conf
> >
> > The HACKING guidelines say to use full path names, the other log
> > messages use full path names, you should use full path names.
>
> It does not say anything about full path names. It only says something
> about path names when your changes are strewn about in all sorts of
> places.
Play by example. Like I said, there are 7000+ examples when you run
svn log on the svn repository.
> As for the details of the fop scripts - they are not obvious. It has
> nothing to do with ignoring errors. I've already been over this one. I
> copied Sander's suggestion. If you have issues with his suggestion, you
> two put your heads together and come up with a consensus.
Philip is right. That is the case in 99% of the cases, and you will learn
that if you stick around ;). I gave an example based on your log message
text, not on the full commit message. Philip did a more thourough job
and gave you constructive feedback with examples of how to phrase things.
> > I'm not really interested in Mandrake or Java, I tend to ignore the
> > dev list emails about them. As far as I can tell you have added some
> > sort of Java patch (fairly large) to the Madrake build. What does it
> > do? Did you write it? Did someone else? I should be able to tell
> > from the log message, just a single sentence summary will do.
> >
> > I must admit I don't understand why you need to make such extensive
> > changes to the build system in order to build Mandrake packages.
>
> There is a patch that's been floating around in this discussion. It
> modifies the javahl directory in the subversion/bindings/java.
>
> Since *I* don't own the patch, I simply added it so that at least a
> Mandrake JAVAHL RPM could be built. I will be removing it as soon as the
> patch is finalized.
Wait a minute. You are applying a big-mother-of-a-patch to a package,
when the real place this belongs is the trunk? I'm sorry, but that is
just plain silly. Try shepherding the patch into the trunk instead, so
that all platforms can benefit. If the patch doesn't make it in, it
probably is not a good patch, implying that the madrake package shouldn't
carry it either.
> As for the changes to the build system, explain to me:
[... lots of questions ...]
> If you can answer all of these questions, you'll understand why I've
> done what I've done.
I have one counter question:
Why didn't the previous Mandrake RPM maintainer have the same problems
as you had.
> I've created an RPM build process that can be run by anyone.
Is that necessary? Building RPMs is usually something that should be
easy for packagers AFAIK.
> I've created an RPM build process that allows you to configure what you
> want to happen at the command line intelligently, and your choices
> propagate through. I've allowed you to filter out the noise, as well as
> turn it back on. I've allowed you to specify where your java is, as well
> as if you want the java bindings built, whether you want documentation,
> or couldn't care less.
>
> I've given sweat and blood to make this usable for just about anyone.
And we have done the same replying and explaining things to you. Furthermore,
this is not about you. This is about the project.
> And all I get is more and more and more problems and more and more nits,
> and more and more questions.
That's called review and feedback. Be glad you are in an open source
project where people are being critical and are not afraid to tell their
peers.
> Maybe I should have just built it for myself and ignored everyone else.
>
> At least I would have been happy. Stupid me decided he wanted to give
> back to the community and hopefully build or help build the stock
> Mandrake RPMs.
Can you tell me how this is relevant? What kind of reaction do you
expect? FWIW, wining doesn't make the quality of your log messages any
better. It doesn't make the comments go away. Improving does.
> ********************************************************************
>
> Will someone at least for once tell me what the membership of the Log
> Police is and who is in charge?
The full committers body. And if you pass their quality control, the
community will have nothing to complain about either in general.
> I can't keep changing things every time someone *else* thinks that the
> HACKING file needs to be interpreted yet another way.
/me sighs
Why are you the _only_ committer with this problem?
Sander
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Sep 29 02:44:13 2003