Originally posted by Awesomeness
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Paragon Looks To Mainline Their NTFS Read-Write Driver To The Mainline Linux Kernel
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Awesomeness View PostWhy don't Linux kernel devs not use GitLab like normal people? Sending patches to mailing lists is stupid.
Gitlab and Github both have major limitations when it comes to multi maintainer problem.
Read though this carefully when submitting patches you are meant to submit patches to maintainers of particular sections of the Linux kernel.
Gitlab and Github both in fact lack the means to process submitted patches and give them to the right party to sign off.
There is also the requirement for traceability on those submitting patches.
I agree submitting patches to the Linux kernel could be made simpler. Problem is none of the existing tools including gitlab or github are really designed todo the kernel workflow of signoff, scripts/checkpatch.pl and so on. There is a coding project in it self to make a GUI that makes submitting to the Linux kernel straight forwards follow steps and tells you this is wrong don't submit yet.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by oiaohm View Post
Number one Normal people there is no such thing. Linux kernel developers class using a mailing lists as normal.
Gitlab and Github both have major limitations when it comes to multi maintainer problem.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.1...g-patches.html
Read though this carefully when submitting patches you are meant to submit patches to maintainers of particular sections of the Linux kernel.
Gitlab and Github both in fact lack the means to process submitted patches and give them to the right party to sign off.
There is also the requirement for traceability on those submitting patches.
I agree submitting patches to the Linux kernel could be made simpler. Problem is none of the existing tools including gitlab or github are really designed todo the kernel workflow of signoff, scripts/checkpatch.pl and so on. There is a coding project in it self to make a GUI that makes submitting to the Linux kernel straight forwards follow steps and tells you this is wrong don't submit yet.
Gitlab and Github can handle multiple maintainers fine. You can easily assign specific people to review a pull/merge request. Furthermore both services allow you to enforce people to sign their commits with GPG keys for traceability/security.
Also both services have API's that allow you to add additional checks that trigger when creating a pull/merge request which can be programatically defined to do anything. Gitlab is also completely open source so you can customize it as you wish (for someone like Linux maintainers I would recommend gitlab).Last edited by mdedetrich; 17 August 2020, 08:34 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by mdedetrich View PostGitlab and Github can handle multiple maintainers fine. You can easily assign specific people to review a pull/merge request
Gitlab and Github both in fact lack the means to process submitted patches and give them to the right party to sign off.
I said sign off here. This is not the maintainer. The maintainer mailing list gets the patch and lets say it relates to something AMD/Intel you could have a Intel/AMD developer watching the list resend patch back to the mailing list signed by them as fine. So there is more in the Linux kernel system than just a pull and merge request.
Linux kernel is different that you have multiple maintainers and reviewers working together in way that reviewers self opt in and out of reviewing. Both Gitlab and Github are not designed for this model. Please note the review sign does not mean the patch will be merged.
Multi maintainer problem with the Linux kernel is something more creative. Linux kernel mode you have maintainers that can do pull/merge request and each of the maintainers have their pool of reviewers some are human some are bots. The reviewer structure does not have strong formal controls.
To give something to the right party for sign off at times requires you to email a patch to a legal department or equal. Yes this could be that the party that needs to sign off happens to be somewhere like china and the great firewall is being ass blocking access to website yet email gets though.
Mailing lists seam horrible but they turn out to be quite durable. Remember if you are running a email server and you take it off line for less than 4 hours all your email gets though because servers will cache and wait. Email system is designed to cope with quite a percentage of disruption.
Gitlib and github are lacking in mailing list integration and you need the means to email. Lot of ways this means Linux maintainers really do need a fully functional desktop client with email if not email something else as communication durable.
Originally posted by mdedetrich View PostAlso both services have API's that allow you to add additional checks that trigger when creating a pull/merge request which can be programatically defined to do anything.
Of course I can understand people wanting more web based interface. But there are operational things on the maintainers side that have to be addressed like the all important how do I get a patch to a party to reviewer who happens to be in a location that being a jackass with firewalls and other things with the most dependability and least effort.
A project management system that can handling the Linux kernel processes and annoying issues caused by world wide operation in a user-friendly way is one hell of a challenge that I would love to see someone successfully pull off.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by cl333r View Post
Microsoft is a giant and they couldn't finish it, wow, now I'm thinking Btrfs takes so long not because it was badly mismanaged, or was it..?
With BTRFS it's really a wonder it works at all.. considering the problems they had. So Kudos to them getting the project back under control and moving forward.Last edited by k1e0x; 18 August 2020, 01:06 PM.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by oiaohm View PostNot if you read though the way the Linux kernel works.
Gitlab and Github both in fact lack the means to process submitted patches and give them to the right party to sign off.
I said sign off here. This is not the maintainer. The maintainer mailing list gets the patch and lets say it relates to something AMD/Intel you could have a Intel/AMD developer watching the list resend patch back to the mailing list signed by them as fine. So there is more in the Linux kernel system than just a pull and merge request.
Linux kernel is different that you have multiple maintainers and reviewers working together in way that reviewers self opt in and out of reviewing. Both Gitlab and Github are not designed for this model. Please note the review sign does not mean the patch will be merged.
Both of these services have had these fine grained abilities for a while.
Originally posted by oiaohm View PostTo give something to the right party for sign off at times requires you to email a patch to a legal department or equal. Yes this could be that the party that needs to sign off happens to be somewhere like china and the great firewall is being ass blocking access to website yet email gets though.
Originally posted by oiaohm View PostMailing lists seam horrible but they turn out to be quite durable. Remember if you are running a email server and you take it off line for less than 4 hours all your email gets though because servers will cache and wait. Email system is designed to cope with quite a percentage of disruption.
Originally posted by oiaohm View PostGitlib and github are lacking in mailing list integration and you need the means to email. Lot of ways this means Linux maintainers really do need a fully functional desktop client with email if not email something else as communication durable.
Originally posted by oiaohm View PostThis is true but someone has to code the addons to suite the Linux kernel workflow and the communication issues of operating globally this means a web only interface is not good enough. Email for getting messages around globally works decently well.
Of course I can understand people wanting more web based interface. But there are operational things on the maintainers side that have to be addressed like the all important how do I get a patch to a party to reviewer who happens to be in a location that being a jackass with firewalls and other things with the most dependability and least effort.
Also I am pretty sure there isn't going to be a problem for anyone in the world to access a website. Github is accessible in places like China for example (hilariously China tried to ban Github but failed when there was a massive outcry of developers being unable to do their work). Also its not hard to set up multiple domains to post to some hosted Gitlab instance (or heck even raw IP's can work).Last edited by mdedetrich; 18 August 2020, 02:58 PM.
Comment
Comment