This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Neels Hofmeyr nhofmeyr at sysmocom.deOn Mon, May 30, 2016 at 01:56:08PM +0200, Holger Freyther wrote: > Can you elaborate? What are the goofy hacks? Before it was just git, now gerrit has its tag on near everything I do with the code. I wish gerrit were less visible: - add gerrit remote - two upstream repos to sync to (origin and gerrit) - gitk shows every branch twice, once for each remote - checking out a new branch is more complex; because of two remotes, one needs to use the full 'git co -b <localname> --track <remote>/<name>' instead of just 'git co -b <name>' (I could probably work with just the gerrit remote, but then I wouldn't see what our public master repositories are up to) - commit id. I can't just clone, I have to do extra cycles for each clone. - access rules = obstructed access to branches = add 'users/' to all private branches = we have scores of old branches now in a namespace we can't use anymore - elaborate command line args instead of simple pushes Things just got so much more noisy on the git end. > In fact reviewing has been more pleasant for me than before (besides the pain of having to wrangle with Java and doing a FreeBSD port of buck to build and debug it) ok, that's a good thing. My position + smiley means: I found it a hard process but it works the way it is now; I'd have liked gerrit to be less visible in the daily workflows, but whatever. If it's better for your reviewing, it's an improvement. > For patch-series: Either way, sending a 40 patches en-block is not well received. This wouldn't be any better with git dump-email. ;) It doesn't make much sense to split the IuPS dev into separate bits... The branch makes sense as a whole. This is not a typical patch submission, right? Subdividing would be artificial, but ok, can do, if that helps reviewing. > Besides the smiley I think you could have been more constructive, e.g you have admin rights and shell access to the system and I have already pointed you to the "Submit Type" in the project settings. Did you have a look at it to see if for your workflow we are using the wrong "type"? I've spent enough time on gerrit overhead. Do I have to understand this? At least I would prefer not to, to use my resources for the tasks "piling up on my desk" instead. > In osmo-sip-connector.git I changed from cherry-oick to always merge (probably fast-forward is closer to what we want in our change history) and pushed two changes. The last patch can be seen here https://gerrit.osmocom.org/#/c/127/1. yes, that kind of makes sense, but how does this work. I go to the website, reconfigure the project, submit my branch so it comes in as <type> and then configure the project back to what it was? :P What was your <type>, "always merge"? Well, as I said, I hope I don't need to explore that right now... Please confirm that I should/can just push the first handful of IuPS changes to for/master. ~Neels -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/openbsc/attachments/20160530/d3c3a6c8/attachment.bin>