[Calypso] calypso projecet organization

Jelmer Vernooń≥ jelmer at jelmer.uk
Sun Jan 31 07:16:35 PST 2016

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 05:57:39PM +0100, chrysn wrote:
> i'm delighted that the calypso project is seeing more activity, and i've
> finally found the time to read up on what has been posted here, and
> getting an overview of the current branches again.

Welcome back :)

> * committ access: it seems to have become common practice for even
>   people who do have commit access (right now, that'd the alioth project
>   members guido, jelmer, keith and myself) send their patches to the
>   list, and if there is a LGTM / +1 from someone else and no "let's
>   discuss" / -1 from anyone, it gets pushed to alioth/master.
>   this seems like a good workflow to me, especially as pushing something
>   to master doesn't mean it stays there irrevocably / until the next
>   release, but gives a good flow of changes in general.


> * project membership: i'd keep that rather lose, as long as the above
>   flow is used. (for example, based on his initiative and posts on the
>   list, i wouldn't hesitate to accept petter's pending membership
>   request).
>   currently, it's all admins on alioth. i think that's ok for now; it's
>   not like we could differentiate between who may upload a signed tag
>   and who may edit the web page (see below) anyway, at least i didn't
>   find options to that respect in the gui.


> * commit styles: i'm a big fan of --no-ff merged topic branches, as it
>   retains the granularity of "commit often" while still being viewable
>   as a single change as well -- but that becomes a bit impractical when
>   sending patches one-mail-per-commit style, and is more easily reviewed
>   by pushing the commit to a branch or personal repo (alioth allows
>   users to request a /git/calypso/users/${USERNAME}.git repo).
>   guido, what's your stance on that style of pull requests, would it
>   work for you? (afair you expressed a preference for mailed patches).

I don't have a strong opinion on --no-ff vs ff merged branches, but I
do like mailed patches. I don't think mailed patches are incompatible
with either though?

> * python-vobject: calypso deeply depends on python-vobject, which is
>   practically dead upstream. i'd like to take over the library
>   development (or maintenance), and polish up the python3 branch there;
>   the calypso project seems like a good umbrella to that, and i'd apply
>   all mechanisms we're using here to python-vobject too (not sure how
>   well alioth supports having two project names in one project, i'd
>   figure that out on demand). any objections there?
It would be nice to keep it as a separate Python package so others can
use it (rather than e.g. embedding in calypso), but taking it under
the calypso umbrella seems like a good idea to me.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://keithp.com/pipermail/calypso/attachments/20160131/546d5f33/attachment.sig>

More information about the Calypso mailing list