The already complicated (complex?) process for contributing.

[Giovanni Biscuolo]

Hi Simon,

maybe we are drifting... again? ;-)

Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com> writes:

[...]

>> If this is stil not properly documented it will be fixed.
>
> Maybe… and it will be another item in the already very long list of
> steps to complete before contributing.  This is one of my concern: add
> yet another thing to an already complicated process for contributing.

[...]

> Yes, yet another thing to an already complicated process for
> contributing.

[...]

> Yes, yet another thing to an already complicated process for
> contributing.

[...]

While I agree that if some-"thing" (or the lack of, OK?) is
/complicating/ the contributing process, that "thing" should be
addressed, I disagree that _adding_ the **requirement** for contributors
to properly configure git to use git hooks provided by Guix and
understand the purpose of and pay attention to the 'Change-Id' field is
another "thing" that adds /complication/.

Talking in general: if you mean that contributing to Guix is /complex/ I
agree, but /complex/ does not imply /complication/; also, /complexity/
is common to every DCVS based project with significant dimensions that I
know of.

So yes, contributing /in general/ is a complex process and I guess we
all would like it to be less complicated as possible; proposals in this
thread are trying to go in this direction: adding a little help in
«integrating a proposed change» with no complications (useless by
design) for _all_ involved parties.

Looking at other project development processes, take as an example
**one** of the activities in the Linux kernel development process:
«posting patches» [1].

You also need to know:

- «Submitting patches: the essential guide to getting your code into the
  kernel» [2]

- «Linux Kernel patch submission checklist» [3]

- «Linux kernel coding style» [4]

- «Email clients info for Linux» [5]...  just to mention one of the
cited MUAs, it states: «Gmail (Web GUI). Does not work for sending
patches..».  Probably Guix should copy/paste that.

Is it /complex/ or /complicated/?

To begin with, it's quite a lot of documentation, quite challenging to
study /just/ to be able to send a useful patch to the Linux kernel... or
/just/ to understand how and _why_ the process is designed that way.

I hear you Someone™ reader: I cannot summarise, sorry! :-D ...anyway
it's a very interesting reading, I'd suggest it. (I did not read all.)

To have an overall picture of the /complexity/ of the whole development
process of the Linux kernel, take a look at «the index» [6]. :-O

Could it be simpified without making it /complicated/ for Someone™?
...maybe.

Is Guix development process comparable to the Linux kernel one? ...who
knows :-D


Thanks! Gio'


[1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/5.Posting.html

[2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html

[3] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submit-checklist.html

[4] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html

[5] https://docs.kernel.org/process/email-clients.html
"Run away from it.": ROTFL!

[6] https://docs.kernel.org/process/index.html

-- 
Giovanni Biscuolo

Xelera IT Infrastructures

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature