Re: Guix Days: Patch flow discussion

[Steve George]

Hi Leo,

On 05/02/2024 14:07, Leo Famulari wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, at 04:39, Steve George wrote:
> > Our goal for the discussion:
> >
> >         How do we double the number of patches that are *reviewed* and
> >         *applied* to Guix in the next six months?
> >
> > Patch flow is a pipeline, to change it we could:
> >
> > a. Increase the number of committers - more people to do the
> > work
> > b. Increase the efficiency of existing committers
> > c. Open the gates by decreasing the quality expected from patches
>
> Hi George,

Just 'Steve' :-)

> It's an important subject and, in my opinion, more important than any technical 
> questions at this stage of the project.
>
> However, I think the question assumes that all contributions should be 
> accepted, and that the entire problem is that we are not accepting them 
> efficiently enough. We should not unconsciously accept this assumption.
>
> Guix can reject contributions, either in a general way (we don't want that type 
> of thing in Guix), or due to specific reasons (the code is not idiomatic, the 
> contributor can't work effectively with the rest of the group, etc).
(...)

Today there are 1264 bugs with patches attached to them today [0].

We don't have any stats (that I'm aware of) that show how many patches 
the project reviews and either asks for edits, rejects or applies.

The group - and I hope the minutes reflect this - wanted to maintain the 
current standards. So the discussion of the pipeline focused on how we 
review more patches, and make decisions about them: whether that 
decision is to accept the contribution, ask for more work, or reject it 
as out of scope.

To answer your comment about the 'unconscious' assumptions - my personal 
view is:

* I don't think ALL patches should simply be accepted
* I do think that more patches need to be reviewed and a decision made
* I believe (no evidence) the project is missing out on great 
contributions amongst those 1200+ patches in the tracker
* I believe (no evidence) that potential contributors are put-off by the 
speed of review / lack of clarity

Thanks,

Steve

[0] https://debbugs.gnu.org/rrd/guix-patches.html