[Bf-committers] Withdrawal

Campbell Barton ideasman42 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 16 04:10:59 CEST 2014 

To follow up on a related point.

Making this list of bugfixes is quite time consuming and unless you
read the commit logs daily _and_ know the code, its quite hard to tell
which issues to include in the release log.

It would be good if there was some indication from a commit to know if
the bug is from some recent change, or if its a bug in the previous
release.


Suggest we could indicate this in the subject:

- Fix T1234: Some Text
- WIP Fix T1234: Some Text
- Regression Fix T1234: Some Text


Meaning:

- Fix - regular fix for a bug existed in last release.
- WIP Fix - fix for change in new code (never in a release)
- Regression Fix - fix for bug introduced in a release.


Many fixes would be WIP, so at a glance we can tell not to include
(its useful for reading commit logs too).
Often I write something like "Fix for recent change in ..." so typing
'WIP' is less hassle.

Although I'm not sure its practical to enforce this long-term (we
attempted complicated conventions before and ended up not using).

Any suggestions?

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 5:08 AM, Gavin Howard <gavin.d.howard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, if I don't get it done, you have to. The time constraint was so
> you could expect it done before having to work on it yourself.
>
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey.vfx at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sounds cool, only not sure why to define such a time constraints?
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Gavin Howard <gavin.d.howard at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In reality, Ton, I sent that email only to you; I didn't know Sergey's
>>> address, I didn't want to spam the mailing list, and I was already too
>>> embarrassed. (So much for that.) So it's not Sergey's fault. And
>>> neither is it yours; I know you're busy, so I was planning on
>>> resending the email today anyways. But I should have sent it to the
>>> whole list. Yet another mistake. Sorry.
>>>
>>> The truth is that I'm not frustrated with you all. What did me in was
>>> going back through and trying to clean up the fixes as Sergey said. I
>>> thought I understood what he said, and I realized that I didn't. Like
>>> I said, it was my own incompetence at following simple instructions.
>>> Just to be clear, I never thought I was insulted. I simply get
>>> frustrated with myself quite easily, especially after last summer.
>>>
>>> Sergey, your clarifications helped. (I think.) Give me 24 hours to go
>>> back through and get it up to standard.
>>>
>>> God Bless,
>>> Gavin Howard
>>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Sergey Sharybin <sergey.vfx at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > I didn't actually see your mail from monday. Either it got lost somewhere
>>> > in my client or i dunno.
>>> >
>>> > As for the fixed bugs section it's not that bad actually, the stuff Ton
>>> > mentioned in the minutes are just guidelines for that page to make it
>>> > maintainable. It doesn't mean it's fully wrong or so. Main issue with the
>>> > page is that it lacks information about the revision range it's valid
>>> for.
>>> > So if you suddenly becomes busy and i (or cambo or whoever else) need
>>> > finish it -- it'll be rather tricky to figure out where to start. To
>>> avoid
>>> > such issues, we put on the top of the page:
>>> >
>>> >   Changes from revision AAA up to BBB
>>> >
>>> > It should be really easy for you to add information about revision your
>>> > list is updated to.
>>> >
>>> > Other issue is that i saw quite a few fixes which were a fixes for new
>>> > stuff added to 2.72. We don't mention that in the change log. It should
>>> be
>>> > easy for you again to just ignore such fixes for the rest of the
>>> revisions
>>> > from now on up to the very release. We'll need to clean up existing list
>>> > from those fixes, but for that you can have at least mine help, and as
>>> max
>>> > -- there could be more volunteers to help cleaning stuff up.
>>> >
>>> > And the structure issue is also not that difficult to solve. It's just
>>> > matter of using old structure and copy-pasteing new fixes to it. Or
>>> > renaming the sections, so Modeling is more like a Mesh Editing,
>>> Compositor
>>> > is Node / Compositor and such. Sticking to some "standard" template is
>>> good
>>> > for the readability of changes imo. And for this you can also use my help
>>> > or help from someone else in the community.
>>> >
>>> > So to summarize, there is some clean up to be done on the fixes page, but
>>> > it's not that much of work and it doesn't mean you need to do it all
>>> (we'll
>>> > for sure help with the cleanups and so). And consider information from
>>> > Ton's mail about fixed bugs section as a guideline for the future work on
>>> > that section. Do not consider it as an insult on your work, we really
>>> > appreciate your help.
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 9:11 PM, Ton Roosendaal <ton at blender.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi Gavin,
>>> >>
>>> >> Sorry, it's unfortunate that nobody replied to your mail from last
>>> monday.
>>> >> I had no time either.The issue would/could have been easy to handle in
>>> irc
>>> >> though... asking sergey or campbell or me. I can only confirm they've
>>> been
>>> >> very busy and didn't notice or forgot the mail.
>>> >>
>>> >> In any way - most important is to at least keep communicating! When that
>>> >> fails it's usually the core of the issues in a volunteering
>>> organization.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'll ask Sergey to clarify the remarks I copied to the minutes.
>>> >>
>>> >> -Ton-
>>> >>
>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> Ton Roosendaal  -  ton at blender.org   -   www.blender.org
>>> >> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
>>> >> Entrepotdok 57A  -  1018AD Amsterdam  -  The Netherlands
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 14 Sep, 2014, at 5:09, Gavin Howard wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > All,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > This is going to be a pretty weird email, but whatever.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I've been using Blender for several years now, after being introduced
>>> >> > to it while at version 2.49. I used it a little, then set it aside for
>>> >> > a while. A year later, I came back to a wonderful 2.5x series. I was
>>> >> > excited, and because I /thought/ I could program, I wanted to help.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I was /completely/ wrong about my skill.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I bombed GSoC 2013, and as a result, I got super frustrated at myself
>>> >> > and went into "hiding". After a while, and more education, I decided
>>> >> > to do something a little more humble: the Release Notes.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > As you all know from last week's Developers' Meeting, I did the
>>> >> > Release Notes wrong, especially on the Bug Fixes page. I went back
>>> >> > through and tried to fix the problems, but my judgment is lacking, and
>>> >> > I'm sure that I didn't quite fix them. Quite frankly, I am frustrated
>>> >> > with my ineptitude yet again.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I know that the Blender Foundation doesn't need my help, and at this
>>> >> > point, I am pretty sure my "help" is a burden in several ways. So I
>>> >> > really wonder if it would be better without me.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I sincerely hope it hasn't been a burden in /every/ way. Regardless of
>>> >> > if I have or not, I think it's time I call it quits. I'm just not
>>> >> > competent enough to help out, even in a non-development role.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I will finish out this release, but once 2.72 (and any 'a' or other
>>> >> > subsequent bugfix release) is out, I will not "help" out anymore. I'll
>>> >> > still be a user; Blender (and Cycles!) helped me secure a spot in
>>> >> > BYU's Animation Emphasis for the Computer Science major, and I don't
>>> >> > intend to stop using it. But my role in its development will
>>> >> > disappear.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Sorry, Campbell; I know you don't like doing those Release Notes.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Thanks for everything.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > God Bless,
>>> >> > Gavin Howard
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > Bf-committers mailing list
>>> >> > Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> >> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> >> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > With best regards, Sergey Sharybin
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Bf-committers mailing list
>>> > Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> With best regards, Sergey Sharybin
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers



-- 
- Campbell

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list